v] 


<^ 


/a 


^> 


/A 


VV'# 


y 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.0 


I.I 


HIM  f^5 

12.0 


■•25  ■  1.4 


1.8 


1.6 


Photogmphl 

Sciences 

Corpordlion 


h 


// 


/. 


\ 


^Xl 


K 
^ 


V 

^ 


4G^^ 


\\ 


6^ 


k 


-«^;1^ 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREIT 

4VEBSTER,  NY.  14580 

(716)  872-4503 


^ 


"^ 


4^ 


^ 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microkiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  Institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


D 


D 


D 


D 
D 


D 


D 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 


□    Covers  damaged/ 
C< 


*ouverture  endommagde 


Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaurde  et/ou  pellicul6e 


I      I    Cover  title  missing/ 


Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 


I      I    Coloured  maps/ 


Cartes  gdographiques  en  couleur 

Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 


I      I    Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 


Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 

Bound  with  other  material/ 
Relid  avec  d'autres  documents 

Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  re  liure  serr^e  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distortion  le  long  de  la  marge  intdrieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajoutdes 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  6tait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6t6  film6es. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppldmentaires: 


L'Institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  6t6  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-dtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  methods  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiquds  ci-dessous. 


I      I   Coloured  pages/ 


D 
D 
Q 
D 


n 


Pages  de  couleur 

Pages  damage* .' 
Pages  endommagtes 

Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pages  restaur6es  et/ou  pelliculdes 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
Pages  d6color6es.  tachet6es  ou  piqu^es 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  detachdes 


I     7   Showthrough/ 


Transparence 

Quality  of  prir 

Qualiti  indgale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  materij 
Comprend  du  materiel  supplementaire 


I      I    Quality  of  print  varies/ 

I      I    Includes  supplementary  material/ 


Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 

Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuiliet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  6x6  film6es  6  nouveau  de  fa^on  6 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  filmi  au  taux  de  reduction  indiqu6  ci-dessous. 


10X 

14X 

18X 

22X 

26X 

30X 

^ 

12X 

16X 

20X 

24X 

28X 

32X 

9 

Stalls 
s  du 
lodifier 
r  une 
Image 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

Harold  Campbell  Vaughan  Memorial  Libriry 
Acadia  University 


The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  tha 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  whe,i  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  --^  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 


L'exemplaire  film6  fut  reproduit  grdce  it  la 
g6n6rositd  de: 

Harold  Campbell  Vaughan  Memorial  Library 

Acadia  University 


Les  images  suivantes  ont  6x6  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  et 
de  la  nettetd  de  l'exemplaire  filmd  et  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 

Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couvertur?  en 
papier  est  imprimde  sont  film6s  en  commenpant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'iilustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  selon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  film6s  en  commengant  par  la 
premidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'iilustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
emprointe. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaitra  sur  la 
dernidre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbole  — ^>  signifie  "A  SUIVRE",  le 
symbole  V  signifie  "FIN". 


Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  dtre 
film6s  d  des  taux  de  reduction  diffdrents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  cliche,  il  est  film6  d  partir 
de  Tangle  supdrieur  gauche,  de  gauche  A  droive. 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  n6cessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suii/ants 
illustrent  la  mdthode. 


trrata 
to 


pelure, 
n  d 


n 

32X 


1 

2 

3 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

tH- 


--^ 


.-^.^p«a— ■ 


1 


■\ 


A  M  A  I^  Y  S  I  S 

Ol'  THE  LATli 


ESFOl 


^, 


BETWEEN  OUR  ADMINISTRATION     .p  \. 


AND 


(IREAT  BRITAIN  &  FRANCE. 

t 

WITH  AN  ATTEMPT  TO  SHEW 

f   V\CMAT  ARE  THE  REAL  CA  USES 

% 


:i/. 


OF  THE 

FAILURE  OF  THE  NEGOCIA TION. 


-'•i*«tt^!^^©^^?!«K«35«5i- 


Jisera,  dumcupif  paccm,  belli  metu  in  belluin  incidit.'' 


rioBUS, 


"  Wretched  admini^tratiun  1  \vhirh,  desiring  jjeace,  from  a  dastardly  dread  (Jf 
tear,  plunged  itself  into  the  very  war  which  it  wished  to  avoid." 

•*  Cavciidum  snltein  est,  nequid  fiat,  quod  prodat  majorcm  fivvorem  erga  partem 
imam  qnam  alteram,  ne  jitsta  dctur  parti  uni  de -neutrnlitate  non  exacta  servata, 
quw'ela/'  noLFius. 

|Ve  should  take  care,  that  nothing  he  dime  which  should  sliew  more  favour  to  one 
t^n^ty  than  thw  other,  lest  we  sli(|}uld  give  Just  cause  of  ooinplaiut  that  our  neutraiitt/ 
i'^nnt  observed." 


■  ■  ♦- 


l^.' 

V*--*;©* 


SC.ISf  tfc  4NB  CVTlKIf,  PHIKTERS. 


*  ' 


4V 


ANi 


:»*<' 


♦  * 


4| 


►  \ 


> 


/ 


displaj/, 


respondent 
France,  zci 
ject  is  deep 
both  of  ur^ 
llsh  them 

enlightenet 
touted  in  dij 
discussion, 
inoiis  conse 
1 
bi 
1 

/ress,  and 
sources  of  t 
total  annilh 
causes.  Ti 
Bw/  the  sec 
to  be  sough 
are  not  cure 
sures  zcill  st 
pi'csent  suj) 
cij — Our  ru 
hind  the  see 
compel  then 
us  which  K 
L  policy. 

l\ 

wr  mutual 
T 

Congress — i 

^store  peoc 

T 

*dct,  and 

udison^s  r< 

Ifon's  pre 

plittionai 

\cdJrom 


4 


^ 


.!^ 


-:i5»£-««t- 


-~^', 


I 


INTRODUCTORY  REMARKS, 


fl 


I 


* 


THE  foUoicing  pieces,  centaining  an  Analysis  of  the  late  cor- 
^  respondencc  behccen  our  Government  and  those  of  Great. Britain  and 
France,  tccre  first  published  in  the  Columbian  Centinel,  but  as  the  sub- 
ject is  deepli)  interesting,  and  from  its  nature  requires  a  connected  course, 
both  of  argument  and  attention,  it  has  been  thought  expedient  to  repub- 
lish them  in  this  form. 

It  is  a  matter  of  deep  regret,  that  some  of  those  superior  and 
enlightened  statesmen,  of  v:hom  zee  have  yet  a  fexo,  zsho  have  been  edu- 
cated  in  diplomatic  life,  have  not  thought  it  their  duty  to  enter  into  this- 
discussion,  and  to  point  out  the  errors  of  our  Administration,  and  the  ru- 
inous  consequences  ishich  uill  inevitably  follow  from  them. 

The  zcriter  of  this  Analysis  has  icaited  anxiously  for  such  a 
display,  but  in  vain. 

The  Publick  mind,  excited  to  the  highest  degree,  by  real  dis- 
tress, and  more  dreadful  prospects,  has  sought  in  secondary  causes,  the 
sources  of  the  public  calamities.      The  arrestation  of  our  commerce,  the 
fatal  annihilation  of  external  as  tcell  as  internal  trade,  are  efl'ects  not. 
causes.     They  are  the  instruments  employed  to  sccurge  and  afflict  us. 
But  the  secret  and  hidden  causes  of  the  infliction  of  this  punishment  are 
to  be  sought  elseu-here.   Remove  our  commercial  restraints,  and  our  evils 
are  not  cured — Our  malady  will  only  become  the  more  inveterate.     Mea- 
sures  xcill  succeed^  so  much  more  disa-ttrous,  as  to  make  us  look  back  to  our 
present  sufferings,  and  to  hail  them  as  blessings.      This  is  not  prophe- 
cy— Our  rulers  have  raised  the  curtain,  and  have  invited  us  to  look  bc- 
$    hind  the  scenes.     They  already  threaten  us,  that  if  our  clamours  should 
\   compel  them  to  abandon  their  present  system,  they  have  evils  in  store  for 
\  us  ichich  icill  make  us  repent  our  ungracious  interference  with  tlieir 
\  policy. 

4  What  then  are  these  hidden  causes  zchich  impel  our  rulers  to 

loi/r  mutual  ruin  / 

1  They  icill  be  found  in  the  secret  journals  of  the  revolutionary 

XJongress — in  motions  to  impeach  or  censure  our  ministers  for  daring  to 

""estoi'e  peace  to  their  bleeding  country  zcithout  the  concurrence  of  France. 

They  icill  be  found  in  the  private  minutes  of  Genet,  Fauchet^ 

*dct,  and  Turrcau..in  the  clamours  against  neutrality  in    \793..in 

'udison\s  resolutions  for  a  commercial  zcar.  .in  the  opposition  to  fVash- 

\ton\<i  proposed pacijick  mission  to  Great.-liritain.. in  the  violent  and 

}olutionary  attempt.^  to  prevent  the  adoption  -of  the  treaty  zchich  re-- 

'icdfrom  that  juission. 


i] 


y/z/f?/ 


.1 


Jr:^ 


4 

They  Ktll  lie  founds  in  shor/,  in  the  tcholo  hi-toij/  of  the  di- 
plumatirk  intrrrouv-c  of  Mr.  Jc{fcrson..in  one  unvarhd  course  of  '•ub- 
viis^ion  tn  France,  and  host ilify  to  Great-Britain.^  of  ichich  the  dispatches 
note  ana/i/seil  form  no  mean  and  undistinguished  part. 

I'hti/,  icho  read  onlij  to  he  amused.,  icho  expa^t  to  find  an  orna- 
Dicnted  and  poli  hed  sti/lc  in  the  foUoKing  Anahjsis,  ziill  be  disappointed. 
Per^piru/tt/ alone  /u/y  appeared  to  the  zcviter  to  be  indispen  able,  -uhen 
emplni/ed  in  exposing  the  sophi'-lrij  of  men.,  xcho  to  covr  their  real  dc- 
Fign^.  veil  them  in  language,  alicaj/s  ambiguous,  undjrequentlif  impenetro- 
hl^  obscure. 


ANALYSIS. 

Of  the  late  Di'spaJchcs  and  Corrcsxumdencc  bchcccn  our  Cab- 
inet and  tJwsc  of  France  and  Great- Britain. 

No.  1. 

AT  last  it  would  sot>m,  <o  tho  eye  of  superficial  observers,  that  the  court 
of  Washington  bail  (leteriniiu'd  to  abandon  that  suspicious  and  insuttinf 
system  oisecrocv,  whirh,  wliileit  contradicted  all  their  former  principles' 
and  professions,  was  calculated  to  ronse  the  jealousy,  and  excite  the  in- 
f'ignation  of  every  independent  man.  If  this  were  true,  little  credit 
^  "ould  be  due  to  the  govermnent,  as  i(  is  well  known,  and  will  be  long  re- 
cillected,  that  this  information  was  withheld  until  it  could  no  longer  bo 
of  use  ;  that  it  was  suppressed  until  the  United  States  were,  against  their 
o\»n  seii^e  and  wishes,  plunged  into  a  state  little  short  of  actual  hoslilifv 
with  the  two  most  powerful  nations  of  Ruropc,  into  a  desperate  and  for- 
lorn  situation,  in  which  retrograde  movements  involve  eternal  disgrace, 
and  perseverance,  or  progressive  steps,  inevitable  ruin. 

Nor  ought  it  to  be  overlooked,  that  even  this  scanty  portion  of  light, 
which  gives  us  only  a  glance  into  our  future  dark  and  gloomy  prospects, 
was  not  vohmlarily  bestowed,  but  wascxtorted  by  the patriotick exertions 
of  the  opponents  of  our  late  destructive  system. 

But  it  will  be  seen  in  the  course  of  this  Analysis  that  even  this  affected 
frankness  of  eomnuinication  is  an  illusion.  Kvery  thing  which  may  tend 
to  implicate  the  administration  may  have  been  and  probably  has  been 
withheld,  and  we  are  treated  with  detached  fragments,  and  broken  sen- 
tences, fro. n  the  letters  of  our  foreign  ministers,  which  only  ixcite  the 
strongest  suspicions  of  the  alarming  nature  of  those  which  are  suppressed. 

Is  this  the  language  of  disaffection  only,  and  unreasonable  jealousy  ? 
Can  it  be  illiberal  to  doubt  the  sincerity  W  men,  who.  in  earlier  and 
iappier  times;  before  they  had  been, so  skilled  in  jjolitical  cunning,  were 


;,:-j5*  -*' 


,y 


couri       . 
uitinf      ^ 


I 


<l('ciarc(l  by  a  friend  who  knew  tliom  well  to  liavc  a  ••  liuii^uaire'confulon- 
tial  antl  a  lanijuagf  (iiViciaP'  ?— [,SVe  GeneVs  lcl/erst~\ — Is  it  un:?tMn.Mous 
to  suspect  nun  who  have  been  educated  irt  the  intrignins;  politics  of 
Frince,  to  be  capable  of  making  foruial  dispatches  to  «atisfv  the  publick, 
and  of  (hwarling  those  di-spatches  hy  their  confulentidl  coniinunications  ? 

If,  for  exaniph',  it  should  be  necessary  to  satisfy  the  British  cabinet, 
and  prevent  an  open  rupture,  that  our  administration  should  preserve,  tlu; 
appearance  of  resistance  to  the  nn  just  and  abominable  measures  of  FranctJ, 
is  it  not  quite  conceivable,  that  with  the  approbation  of  Mons.  Cham- 
pagny,  an  ofl'icial  note  may  be  delivered  by  our  minister,  making  a  formal 
remonstrance  to  the  decrees  of  France,  in  order  to  give  fresh  force  to  our 
complaints  against  Great-firitain  ?  It  may  be  supposed,  and  our  cabinet 
would  have  it  believed,  that  France  would  not  consent  to  such  a  system, 
inasmnch  as  she  wished  to  involve  ns  in  an  open  war  with  England  ;  but  I 
am  persuaded  it  will  app  ar  that  France  is  fully  satisfied  with  the  existing 
state  of  things  ;  that  it  gives  her  all  the  benefits  she  could  liope  to  derive 
from  our  avowed  alliance,  without  obliging  her  to  any  pecuniary  sacrifi- 
ces (o  maintain  our  cause. 

I'esides,  this  half  way  state  befween  absolute  alliance  and  depiMidence, 
and  perfect  independence,  gives  her  the  most  favourable  opportuni<y  to 
draw  very  consideraI)lr  revenue  from  us  in  (he  form  of  captures  and 
seizures,  which  would  be  vastly  more  diifuull  in  a  state  of  avowed  co;i- 
necfion  and  amity. 

This  proposition  I  will  veiit'.irc  ♦o  state  without  the  dread  of  contra- 
diction,  that  it  will  app -ar  by  a  close  and  candid  examination  of  these 
dispatches,  (although  they  arc  arU'iiilv  selected  to  intpose  uron  the  p<'o. 
pie)  that  (lie  government  of  the  Uniied  States  have  a  jjerfect  prix-iitc  iin- 
tterstandin^  with  France,  and  are  deferniined  to  resist  all  the  lionoura- 
bleand  amicable  proposals  of  (Jreat  Britain. 

'J'he  first  document  published  by  our  government,  is  a  letter  from  Mr. 
Madison  to  Mr.  Armstrong,  dated  May  "J^d.  1807  : — and  (he  lirst  in- 
CMiiry  which  occurs  to  us  upon  it,  is,  why  (his  letter  was  no*  inclnil  "!  in 
the  commniiications  of  the  president  in  the  winter  of  ISO:^.  v.  lien  it  was 
lirelendcd  that  he  communicated  to  ronyress  all  the  (  nrrcsponien;','  of 
any  importance  between  us  and  foreign  courts,  and  if  he  had  not  "-o  de- 
clared,  it  was  his  duty  to  have  maile  ])nblick  such  iiui)ortant  pip.-rs,  in 
which  no  matter  requiring  secrecy  existed. 

2dly.  It  appears  that  our  administration  chose  to  conside*' t'le  Bcr'in 
decree  as  vague  and  nncortain  as  to  its  intentions,  or  as  Mr.  Ma.lison  in 
tlie  cabinet  jiirsron  calls  it,  "  inarticulate''''  and  that  thev  chose  to  presMnie, 
and  did  allect  to  presume,  it  was  not  intended  to  operate  against  ns, 
though  it  is  well  known  to  every  merchant's  clerk,  that  we  were  the  cn- 
ly  neutral  nation  at  that  time,  and  the  onlv  one  of  course' tipon  whon 
the  decree  could  operate.  Overlooking  this  notorious  fact,  as  well  nu- 
derslood  by  the  goveniiuent    as   In  evrr\  bodv  else.  thecabii\:t  go  still 


K\ 


\ 


'' 


i 


..ap.'- — -i 


i3i*S3B- 


::,^-m^mik 


(> 

further,  and  aflVr t  to  foel  a  delight  in  the  explanations  of  the  minister  of 
marine,  though  every  man  offense  perfectly  iiiiderstood  their  duplicity  : 
though  that  minister  expressly  disclaimed  all  authority  to  decide  for  Mr. 
Talleyrand,  who  was  absent  :  though  men  of  intelligence  in  our  conn, 
fry  at  the  time  predicted,  indeed  were  certain  of  the  purposed  fallacy  of 
those  explanations.  The  event  has  proved,  not  that  our  government  was 
mistaken,  for  they  never  believed  the  minister  of  marine  sincere,  but 
that  the  French  government  adopted  that  irregular  and  ludicrous  course 
in  order  j)rohably  to  prevent  an  instant  retaliation  on  the  part  of  Great 
Britain;  but  as  soon  as  their  policy  required,  they  denied,  as  was  pre- 
dicted, the  authority  of  the  minister  of  marine,  and  declared  that  the  de- 
crees  had  no  exception  whatever.  Indeed  if  they  had  no  applicability  to 
us,  they  were  jierfectly  nugatory,  ,is  no  other  neutral  nation  then  ex- 
isted. This  fact  is  an  unanswerable  one,  and  j)roves  the  falsliood  and  in- 
sincerity of  our  fiibinet. 

Mr.  Madison  goes  on  to  presume  that  the  French  orders  would  ho  fa- 
zoiirabhj  expounded.     Which  he  declares  to  be  the  most  probable  event. 

Why  jiresumeit?  I'lomthepast  conduct  of  France  towards  us  ? 
When  did  she  ever  perform  any  stipulation  in  our  favour  either  under 
our  old  trea<y  or  the  existing  one  ?  Is  there  one  solitary  instance  of  her 
good  faith  ?  Is  if  to  be  foiind  in  the  condemnation  of  the  lirst  captured 
vessel,  the  ship  Jay,  in  violation  of  tiK!  stipulation  that  free  ships  should 
make  free  gootis  ?  Shall  we  hnd  it  in  the  decree  which  declared  all  Bri- 
tish manufactures  on  board  o'lr  ships  lawful  prize  ?  and  which  further 
condemned  the  vessel  and  cargo  for  having  any  amount  of  them  onboard  ? 
Is  it  to  be  perceived  in  the  inhuman  decree  which  sentenced  to  death  all 
meiilrals  found  on  board  enemies'  shijts,  though  serving  by  force?  Or 
was  this  great  confidence  derived  from  the  peculiar  sense  of  justice  and  re- 
iiAvd  to  neutral  rights  mauifested  by  the  jjrescnt  emperour  ?  Was  the 
violation  of  the  I'russian  territory,  the  seizure  of  the  duke  d'Knghein  in 
<he  neutral  statis  of  the  elector  of  Baden,  and  the  daily  violation  of  the 
right;,  of  all  weaker  states,  sufficient  pledges  to  our  admiring  and  submis- 
f-jve  cabinet  ? 


al 

isl 


tl 


cc 


No.  2. 

I'S  spite  of  the  constant  experience  of  the  infidelity  of  the  French 
Cabinet,  which  has  in  every  period  of  its  history  made  sport  of  all  its  en- 
gagements with  us,  Mr.  Madison  tells  Mr.  Aumstuong,  that  it  is  ;jro- 
imble  that  the  French  decree  would  be  favourably  expounded  towards  u; . 
If  this  letter  had  been  an  othcial  one,  directed  to  the  Cabinet  of  St. 
C'A)(/(/,  the  principles  of  civility  might  have  induced  our  goverument  to 
have  adopted  the  language  of  insincerity  :  but  in  a  private  letter  to  our 


«— -"^ ' 


of 


own  minister  no  apology  can  l>c  made  for  this  compliment  to  the  upright 
views  of  Fiance,  and  it  must  be  admitted  to  have  proceeded  solely  from  a 
devotion  to  tha»  Court. 

Jt  was  the  more  extraordinaiy,  as  it  is  apparent  from  the  tenor  of  the 
Dtrlin  decree,  that  it  could  have  no  possible  operation  e\x.ept  upon  the 
commerce  of  the  United  States. 

We  wore  the  only  nation  which  then  visited  the  ports  of  England  :— 
We  were  the  only  people  on  whom  the  blockade  cuuld  operate  ;  and  to 
admit  an  interpretation,  which  rendered  the  decree  absurd  and  nugatory, 
18  um^quivocal  proof  of  a  disposition  to  submit  to  the  grossest  deception 
from  the  Cabinet  of  iS'/.  Cloud. 

This  very  letter  of  Mr.  Madisov,  contains  the  most  perfect  proof  that 
our  government  did  not,  and  could  not  have  believed  the  interprot.iiiou 
given  informally  by  Mr.  Decres,  sincere. — For  ir.  contains  an  admission 
that  the  French  cruisers  in  the  Wc'^t-lndies  had  enforced  the  decree 
against  us,  and  that  these  depredations  constituted  just  cl;iims  of  re- 
dress.— Have  any  of  these  captured  ships  been  restored  ?  If  they  have, 
shew  us  the  case  and  the  decision. 

This  letter,  it  will  be  remarked,  is  dated  May  22d,  1807,  and  is  a  full 
and  perfect  refutation  of  an  assertion  in  the  report  of  the  committee  of 
congress,  just  made,  recommending  a  perseverance  in  our  hostile  mea- 
sures, in  that  report  u  is  stated,  that  the  Horizon  was  the  first  case 
which  had  occurred  of  the  e.tension  of  the  Berlin  decree  to  us,  and  that 
that  decree  did  not  take  place  ♦lill  September,  1807. 

If  it  be  said,  that  the  Wcst-^ndia  cases  were  only  the  acts  of  inferior 
courts,  wc  may  ask  whether  tliey  have  been  in  any  single  instance  re- 
versed ? 

We  would  also  enquire  why  it  is,  that  Mr.  Armstrong's  remonstrances 
on  this  subject  are  suppressed  ?  And  whether  he  has  ever  made  any 
complaint,  or  whether,  as  in  another  case,  he  thought  the  "  application 
would  not  only  be  useless,  but  injurious  ?" 

This  recals  to  our  recollection  a  former  instance  of  subserviency  to 
France,  in  which  one  of  our  ministers  told  the  cabinet  of  France,  that  wo 
should  not  only  bear  the  departure  from  our  stipulated  rights  "  with  pa- 
tience, but  with  pleasure." 

We  should  not  have  recurred  to  this  ancient  proof  of  devotion  to  the 
views  of  France,  if  it  had  not  furnished  a  fair  and  natural  occasion  to 
remark,  that  a  set  of  men,  who  in  1795  could  justify  and  defend  the  out- 
rageous and  ur^masked  profligacy  of  France,  in  its  conduct  toward  us, 
could  not  be  expected  to  discover  any  considerable  degree  of  spirit^ 
against  her,  now  her  power  is  so  vastly  increased. 

The  second  letter  is  from  Mr.  Madison  to  Gen.  Armstrong,  and  its 
features  are  still  more  strongly  marked  with  servility  and  devotion  to 
France.  It  acknowledges  the  receipt  of  the  evidence  of  the  violation, 
not  only  cf  our  treatVj  but  of  every   principle  of  humanity,  in  the  con. 


1   \\\\ 


.'     I J  ^  1 


Ti^^W^ 


--«««  ?^jg{^ 


\ 


\ 


8 

the  Frond.  <^-'^^r^X^ .o..^n:n.u'^  ^'^^^"^^f -a.    mcr  ..ccasin,  r.- 


•       ^f  tl,.«  llonit»i>,  Willi"  I". •  r,.siKnt(«U  uw  «;..•....-  " 


ion   that  the  ^^^'^^^'^^^^l^^.^^^'l  -o  cause  o   co^^-  ^^^^^^^ 
,.  a  numkilvU  -^^^;^^uUnnv>Utick    concession   lu    t-.^^^  ^^^,^^^.. 

,amc  ^l'''^^^''">>;"'Tconar.ss,  wh<>  '^'i^^^'  ^^  1  Utile  con^Uleratiou. 
the  late  conmuttcc  of  ConM  ^^,^^^  .^  '^^-'''Jtr^f  .overnme.it,  for 
ntisniram\  n'?-n  I  to  «u  ,  ^^^^  ^^^^.^  ^^^''^'"^orie.ri'cvec  of  Berlin. 
This  single  ulea  s    V^^  J  ,,Hho.,.t  leiuon.tva.ice   to     -  .^^^^j^.^  i,,t. 

bavins  tai.ely  ^^^  »  '^^^  :,a  ,,,,„  no  order  or  ^^^  ^  ;    ^^  \,f  p.-ance  and  her 
Now  ^"m'0^^\V';\t,a\  vessels  cutenns  the  i^    ts  ^^^^i-,^,.  „f 

-"^^^yJ^'^'^'tScd^'^^^-^^,  <-  I^^^Tl/'heXloii^es,  shouUl  be 
allies,  having  ^' "  ^',;,^,  f^,,„rc  of    l''"S^:^f  .  *^'    '';,,,, aw  of  nations,  and 

the  growth  ^"^   \"J  Lis  not  this  a  ^'"'^     "  "^'/^a  us  ? 

seized  and  coiUscatca  ■  ,„tucen  1;  .•  "ce  a  ^^^^^^  ^^ 

a  directbreach  "^  ^  ^/^^  ^^.^ .  ,f  onr  ''-''^^'"V      hi  perhaps  it  may,  couUl 
Does  not  the  l'^^\,J''  '^  \„av  b^  ^^«'»'^^^"V  ?'",  V the   entry,  but  order 
this  privilege  ?-ov,  \f  ^"^S-,  „ot  only  i''^.^''-^^'^VH;u, ad  entered  her 
Vrance,  -UlH>vit  F-"^^  '^"I^rstat  s     in  ^lU  contldence 

tbc  eonfiscation  f  l^'^^^^i^and  even  "^'"^ral  states,  ^^,^jy 

ports,  or  those  «    ^^  ^'^^^     ,f  „aticn.s,  and  of  o uj  tjU 
llfprotectionnn  erthcla  ^^.^^^  ""^'"^"j  J.^al  friend?     K  ^^^c 

on  the  groun^^  ^^'''^  uLi  fde  transferred  to  a  "^"^r  ^y^^  seizures 

manufacture  ^^^^^  ->  -^^''"'^  '"t  ^liS  leg^i'-^e  acts.  On 
lawfully  "-'S»!t^";L a,  •„,  France,  arc  at  «'y^'^  ^^^^.^dians,  Mr.  Mad- 
,t  Leghorn  ^^^,^,,A  by  one  of  --£^  fished,  wUl  forn. 
this  Srou.ul  they  .  r    'l^  ,t,„,  '"'^^'n!ec  dented  injuries.    U 

ison  ;  and  this  "J^'  ^    '^  !,,a'niations  far  their  ""F^/;  the  ports  of 

„  „(>rneiual  bar  toaiu  i  /'  interdiction  ot  emiy  ^hidisoirs 

ofvvhtch  i- ranee  hash  c, 

T,io^t  outrageous  violaloi. 


V 

tt  IS  in  Ndi.ill  points  wo  disrcrn  the  fonipcr  and  views  of  men  ;  .mil  \\c. 
mtrviii  our  ifiulcis  to  fxaiiiino  caii' fully  the  bti\:»n  of  tlii'^  apology  for 
Frrncli  outr;ige. 

Towards  (111- clo'io  of  this  Ii'ttcr,  Mr.  M;i'lison  clioosos  to  aniicipato 
that  France  will  romplain  of  untcoulciil  violations,  to  thi>  injury  of 
France,  by  thi'sjovi-rnnu-nt  of  (IriMt-liritain  ; .  .hi' t('"'S  fu 'thiT.  .ht- says, 
^'■//n'l'difrdiiiiof  he  ilcniid  ;"'  that  is,  in  plain  Kni^li^h,  it  is  true  that  CI. 
IJritain  i'.as  !)iH'n  Ihf  Wif^r/cvv**;-,  and  to  tlu>  injury  of  Fraicc,  and  adds, 
"  that  the  French  decree  may  be  i>ronounce(l  a  retaliation  on  the  preccd- 
int;  conduct  of  {}reat.i}ritain.".  .This  we  do  most  solemnly  deny  ;  ami 
as  it  forms  the  l)asis  not  only  of  this  letter,  but  of  the  report  of  the  com- 
niltt.e  in  favor  of  non-interconrse.  .of  Mr  John  Q.  Adams'  letter  to  Mr. 
Otis,  and  of  all  that  has  been  or  can  be  said,  in  extenuation  of  thu 
attrocious  conduct  of  France  ;  we  sliall  devote  to  it  our  next  and  more 
particular  attention. .  .We  shall,  however,  make  in  this  place,  this  serious 
remark,  that  even  if  it  were  true,  it  is  a  concession  which  it  was  exlreuie- 
ly  impolitic  to  niiike,  and  more  so  to  jjiiblish,  since  it  puts  t(»  an  end  for- 
I'ver,  all  our  claims  on  France  for  the  eliects  and  depredations  connnitteil 
under  the  Berlin  and  Milan  decre> 


i 


it  I 


•tt 


.  t 


i 


No.  3. 


"The  French  Decree  mi^ht  on  the  same  ground  fie  pxiinjanciHl  a  retaliation  on 
ihe  preccilinjj  conduct  of  (Jreat-Rritain." 

Sec  Madison's  Ivttfv  to  (icn.  ARM3rRo\n. 

THE  concession  contained  in  the  forct^oinsi;  extract,  is  full  as  nunin, 
and  ought  to  excite  as  i^eneral  indignation,  as  the  same  gentleman's  declar- 
alion  to  Mr.  Randolph,  '^  Fnuice  wuntu  nionnj,  inul  must  have  it." 

The  cflfcct  of  tlic  ])uhlication  of  this  concession  will  be,  to  bur  forever 
tdl  our  claims  for  redress  for  captures  or  injuries  sustained  under  the 
Berlin  and  Mdan  decrees,  and  to  furnish  the  French  with  not  only  pre- 
texts but  justitications  for  any  future  violations  of  our  rights.  It  is  not, 
however,  my  present  purpose  to  display  the  rashness  and  impolicy,  if  not 
ruEACHEHY  of  this  conduct  ; — it  is  sufficient  to  say,  that  in  any  other 
government  it  would  cost  the  officer  his  character  and  employment,  if 
not  his  life. 

It  is  at  present  proposed  to  prove,  that  this  argument  and  concessioii 
furnished  to  France  is  wholly  unfounded  ;  and  that  France  herself  has 
never  set  up  any  such  pretensions,  except  through  the  medium  of  her 
\merican  servants. 

Before  we  examine  the  tnith  of  this  proposition,  it  may  be  useful  to 
•  oiisider  the  force  of  the  terms  used  bv  Mr.  Madition. 


»^^ 


11    I 


.*»■ 


-.ii**- 


10 


The  cvidont  ohjcrt  of  our  SpcrcUiry,  as  well  in  this  IcUcr  as  in  the  latC 
report  ol  ihc  conuiuilcc,  probably  furnished  by  him,  is  to  place  the  inju- 
ries of  I'vance  and  Great  Uritain  on  an  fijuul  lootini";  ;  or,  even  to  give  a 
darker  siiade  to  those  of  tlie  latter.  He  had  just  been  speaking  of  the 
prim  iple  (jf  retaliation  urged  by  Great  Britain  in  justification  of  her  or- 
ders of  N-n-.  1 1,  1807,  and  then  adds,  that  the  "  French  decree  might  on 
the  name  q-roioid  he  pronotniced  a  relaliatifin  on  the  preceding  conduct  of 
(ireat  liritain."  That  is  to  say,  that  the  I'renrh  decrees  might  with  equal 
junficv  not  simply  be  /iret ended  to  be,  but  /ironounced,  a  retaliation  on  the 
British  conduct.  In  still  simpler  language,  France  can  as  justly  defend 
hei'  Berlin  decree  on  the  groiuid  of  retaliation  as  Great  Britain  can  justify 
hers  of  Nov.  1  lih,  on  the  same  grotmd. 

As  it  is  always  best  to  sinijilifv  propositions  as  far  as  possible,  before 
we  proceed  to  prove  the  total  falsity  of  this  position,  we  shall  remark,  that 
even  if  ii  had  been  true  that  the  two  decrees  stood  in  this  respect  mfiari. 
delictum  (in  e(|ual  fault)  still  the  circ\imstances  tuulcr  which  they  were  re- 
.spcctively  issued,  ought  to  have  excited  ten  limes  the  indignation  agauist 
I'rance  as  against  Great  Britain,  instciid  of  drawing  forth  labored  apolo- 
gies in  favoiu"  of  the  former. 

Fimt.  With  France  we  had  a  commkrcfvi.  tkk.vtv,  purchased  at  an 
immense  price,  the  sacrifice  of  the  claims  of  om-  citizens  to  the  amount 
of  at  least  rwKxrv  Miia.ioxs  of  dollars. — This  treaty  cx/tre.suhi  fohuidh 
this  precise  form  of  injury  which  Bon.ipartc  has  adopted.  This  was  the 
firnt  instance  in  which  we  had  ever  had  any  occasion  to  resort  to  the 
stipulations  in  oiu'  favour  ;  and  hi  this  first  instance  are  they  shamelessly 
and  without  apolo;j:y  violated  : — Xor  does  f  ranee  pretend  a  violation  on 
our  part  to  justify  the  outrage.  Let  the  government  shew  any  formal 
complaint  on  the  part  of  France,  prior  to  the  Berlin  decree  ;  and  without 
such  comphint  no  sucli  measure  could  legally  have  been  resorted  to,  even 
if  in  other  respects  justifiable. 

With  Great  Britain  we  were  not  only  united  by  no  treaty,  but  we  had 
rejected  under  the  most  extraordinary  circinnstanccs,  a  convention  which 
had  been  agreed  to  by  our  own  ministers,  and  which  would  have  placed 
oiu"  commerce  and  prosperity  on  the  most  secure  footing.  We  had 
moreover  done  every  thing  to  force  that  govermuent  into  a  declaration  of 
war,  and  oiu'  existing  state  at  the  moment  of  issuing  her  orders  was  at 
least  on  ovu"  side,  that  of  an  enemv,  or  one  disposed  to  be  an  enemy.  We 
had  interdicted  the  entry  of  her  public  ships,  while  we  admitted  those  of 
her  enemy  ;  and  we  htid  gone  as  far  as  it  was  thought  our  people  would 
bear  in  the  system  of  coercion,  by  >io)i  iniliorhition  of  her  manufactures. 
So  ftir  then,  we  had  no  right  to  expect  friendship  from  that  Cabinet  ;  and 
of  coifrsc,  much  less  reason  to  be  irritated  at  any  measures  she  might 
adopt  of  an  imfriendly  nature. 

Seconditj.  France  not  only  gave  us  no  notice  prior  to  the  operation  of 
her  Decrees,  but  by  a  ix)licy  truly  Gallicun,  she  allured  us  into  her  j)ortH, 


»'«  ■.  •» 


I 


•^ 


111 

})y  prctcndiiiGj  tluit  llu-y  should  noi  operate  ap;iiinst  \is  ;  but  when  sht- 
lound  she  had  a  coinpcttMit  (|uaiiiity  of  t^amc  wuhin  her  reach  she  sprnit; 
the  trap,  and  seized  our  unwary  and  dehided  fellow  citizens.  This  seizure 
and  loss  nuist  he  attrilnited  to  the  inconceivable  blindness,  or  wilful  sul> 
niisbion  of  ovu"  Cabinet  to  the  views  of  France.  They  aflected  to  con- 
sider, or  really  belie\cd  this  hulf  veiled  and  syren  like  declaration  ol 
France  sincere  ;  they,  by  this  conduct,  assisted  to  decoy  our  unhappy  citi- 
zens ;  and  ashamed  to  avow  their  errors,  they  even  at  tiie  presi-nt  nio- 
iTient  choose  to  consider  that  France  has  changed  her  views,  rather  than 
has  intentionally  deceived. 

But  Great  J{ritain,  far  from  imitatinc;  the  detestable  perfidy  of  France, 
frankly  notified  our  ij;overnment  the  preceding  year,  that  unless  resisted, 
she  should  be  obliged  to  retaliate  upon  France  those  decrees,  which 
througii  neutrals,  were  aimed  at  her  existence.  Siie  not  only  did  tiiis, 
but  after  waiting  in  vain  for  the  smallest  movemcnl  on  our  part,  when  'die 
actually  issued  her  orders  she  gave  the  most  ample  lime  and  notice  to  all 
neutrals,  to  avoid  falling  within  their  purview  and  ett'ects. 

Thirdlu.  The  decrees  of  France  were  witliout  limitation  as  to  extent  ; 
they  embraced  every  depeudericy  and  colony  of  Great  Biitahi,  through 
out  the  world. 

But  tiiose  of  Great  liritain  left  open  to  us  the  exteiisive  colonies  of  her 
enemies  ;  and  hi  short,  every  source  of  trade  wiiich  was  essential  to  om 
comfort  and  even  prosperity. 

It  has  been  represented,  for  party  purposes,  that  all  this  trade  is  upon 
the  condition  of  paying  her  a  '*  tribute,"  and  even  the  late  conunittee  of 
Congiess  have  given  a  colour  to  this  assertion.  It  is,  however,  nonrue. — 
The  duties  demanded  by  her,  and  which  are  falsely  called  a  "  tribute"  arc 
only  demandable  in  case  we  voluntarily  go  to  Great  Britain,  and  request  a 
I'learanre  for  the  conthiental  ports  of  her  enemies,  which  she  blockades. 
This  is  merely  nominal — a  mere  point  of  honour  between  her  and  France; — 
because  if  Great  Britain  permitted  you  to  go,  1  ranee  would  not.  Her  decrees 
confiscate  your  property  for  the  single  crime  of  having  Ijeen  in  a  British  jiort. 
The  case,therefore,can  never  happen ;  and  she  knew  well  that  it  never  would 
happen.  Why  then  was  it  imposed  ?  As  a  point  of  honour  between  her 
and  her  enemy.  Her  enemy  said.  No  neutral  shall  ever  enter  the  ports 
ci  England — 1  will  captiu'e  and  condemn  them.  Great  Britain,  in  reply, 
says,  No  neutral  who  has  submitted  to  this  usvu'pation  of  France,  shall  go 
thither  without  first  entering  my  ports  ;  and  I  will  tax  the  products  bound 
to  my  enemy,  which  will  enhance  the  price,  if  he  chooses  to  admit  it. 
And  yet,  strange  to  relate,  this  cpialilication  or  modification  is  represent- 
vdygnanli/  n/irrsintc(l,hy  our  impartial  government,  as  more  op[)i'essive, 
more  insulting  than  if  it  had  been  an  absolute  prohibition  ; — tlian  the  de- 
crees of  Irance,  which  are  an  absolute  prohibition  !  Hut  1  repeat  it,  this  is 
merely  a  nominal  provision  ; — for  it  can  operate  only  in  case  France  should 
repeal  her  decrees,  in  which  case  the  whole  fa')ric  is  destroyed  : — But  it 


\' 


*i 


fr 


i- 


Kl 


w 


V 


,  r<^  -*^ 


12 


I 


i% 


does  not  apply  to  the  vast  commerce  of  Spain,  Pomig^al,  Sweden,  the  East 
anil  West  Indies,  iind  all  the  neutral  ports  of  the  worJd. 

Jujurt/ilif.  I'rance  disfmnchiars^  for  ever,  all  American  .s7;//;.v,  which 
at  any  time  after  the  decree  sivall  have  visited  a  British  port.  The 
effect  Of  this  would  h<;,  either  that  a  distinct  set  of  ships  must  have  heen 
kejn  for  the  trade  of  each  country,  or  if  Great  Briuin  had  not  issued  her 
oiciers,  in  tlie  course  of  four  or  five  years  cvcr>-  .imerican  kM/i  woidd  have- 
been  interdicted  the  trade  of  France.  The  men  who  are  so  alive  to  the 
dei>;rud  ition  of  a  "trilnite,"  which  never  has  been  and  never  can  be  ex- 
acted, are  not  only  insensible  to  this  insult  and  violation  of  our  treaty,  but 
our  minister^  openly,  with  the  countenance  of  Mr.  Madison,  jusiify  it,  as 
a  mere  nuir.icipal  rej^ulation  I  What  ?  Are  we  not  entitled  by  treaty  t» 
visit  freely  the  ports  of  the  cnemi(;s  of  France  '■  And  are  wc  not  equally 
secured  in  our  direct  conmierce  with  France  c  And  can  these  two  rit^lUs 
be  considered  secure,  while  every  one  of  our  ships  are  interdicted  an 
entry — nay,  are  confiHcatcd,,  if  they  dare  to  enter  any  French  j)ort  ;  or  ii 
they  siuill  have  visited  any  British  port  in  a  former  Aoyage  '.  No  notice  is 
however  taken  of  this  outras^eous  part  of  the  decree. 

But  Ciieat  Britain  has  made  no  such  arl)itrurydis<juaIincations: — If  you 
escape  the  vii^ilnnce  of  her  frigat*.  s,  and  entei-  your  own  ports,  the  forfeitiu'c 
is  ivoided,  and  she  does  not  assimie  an  imperial  auihoriiy  to  disfriincliise, 
by  standintij  and  permanent  laws,  the  whole  of  your  marine. 

I.ustlu.  The  French  had  no  power  to  enforce  their  blockade  ; — that  the 
measure  had  no  colourable  justitication  under  the  law  ol  nations.  It  had 
the  character  of  impotency  striving  to  outstrip  malii;riity.  They  were 
obliged  to  resort  therefore  to  cunnint^  to  draw  us  within  tlieir  fant^s,  anrl 
the  unhapi'y  victims,  like  the  visitors  of  the  lion,  weic  seen  to  enter  but 
never  to  return. 

Clieat  Britain,  on  the  other  hand,  had  the  means  of  enforcing  a  strict 
and  rigorous  blockade,  and  the  very  men  who  brand  this  blockade  as  ille- 
gal because  nominal,  have  the  shameless  inconsistency  of  deieiiding  the 
emixugo  on  the  ground  that  not  one  of  our  ships  \«ould  have  escaped  cap- 
ture by  (Jreat  Britain  ; — that  if  the  embargo  had  ne^er  been  imposed,  so 
wide  and  efi'ectual  would  be  the  operation  of  the  Britbh  orders,  no  portion 
of  safe  commerce  woulc'  have  been  left  to  us. 

Strange  and  inconsiderate  politicians  1  Defending  by  their  very  conces- 
sions the  policy  they  condemn.  For  if  such  be  the  {xjwer  of  Great  liritau) 
to  enforce  lier  orders,  to  coerce  her  enemy,  to  execute  her  blockade,  tlu; 
perfect  justification  of  them  may  be  ii,rounded  on  that  power.  For  on 
what,  may  it  be  asked,  rests  the  acknowledged  doctrine  of  legal  blockade, 
but  on  the  power  to  coerce  and  distress  an  nitmy  J  "This  power  is  de- 
clared in  the  convention  {>f  the  famous  armed  neutrality,  formed  to  estab- 
lish and  impose  by  force,  a  new,  liberal  maritime  code  ;  to  be  law  fidly 
exercii^ed  whenever  a  ship  cannot  enter  a  blockaded  j)ort  without  inuni 
aent  duntrer  of  being  caplmed."     And  our  politiciaub  condenuj  the  British 


deJ 

OUfl 


.i 

1 


I 


r-...ltyBLg*gl 


1^ 


\.      "l 


I 


13 


decncs,  though  mert  iy  retaliatory  while  they  clfclarc,  that  fv.w  or  noneoi 
our  ships  <  uuld  possibly  tscapi-  the  vit^iiaiuc  of  the  British  cruisers. 

'Ihus  ihtii  tVoni  this  shi/ri  \ie\v,  which  iiiiirju  be  extended  to  a  variety 
nrotlK-rexaniplesorthc  din'ereuce  in  pointof  severity  between  the  I'rencli 
and  British  orders,  it  i,  apparc-nl,  that  iiolhint;-  i)ut  the  grossest  and  most 
wilful  partiality  could  indue*-  Mr.  Madison,  our  cabinet,  our  ioreit;n  nunis- 
ters,  and  the  coinnnttee  of  Congress,  to  place  the  I'rench  and  Biitish  gov- 
ernmcnls  on  a  fo<Jting  of  equality,  or  as  ecjually  meriting  our  resentment 
and  hostility.  But  we  propose  to  pro\c,  that  there  is  not  the  smallest 
pretence  for  the  allegation  that  "  'J'/w  French  dccrt'VH  cai;  nii/i  justice  kr 
fironounccd  us  refaliitiif^ii-i  on  the  conduct  'f  thf  Britinh. 


No.  4. 


•'♦i 


1^ 


i 


\V;is  Frarife,  as  Mr.  .M:.dis<m,  and  tlu-  roinmittcc  of  Cohs^toss  in  imitation  of 
iiim,  iloclart,-,  aiitliorizcil  Id  make  )-ctaliati(i:i  ou  <irtal  Mi-itain,  tlii-oiin'ii  Mmtj-al 
<'()iiini('rci',  us  iniult  as  drtal   IJritain  was  aiithori/ccl  to  letaiialfj  oa  Trancij  ? 

THIS  is  a  most  interesting  question  : — It  decides  the  correctness  or  hi - 
conectness  of  tlie  policy  of  our  Cabinet,  who  allect  to  treat  them  bodi 
alike  ; — and  prole.-sin;-,-  to  consider  this  subject  deliberately,  we  invite  the.- 
I'Uention,  of  eveiy  true  friend  of  our  country.  We  are  bound  to  yield  an 
im])licil.  obedience  to  tlieir  derisions,  we  trust  that  there  is  yet  suiucicut 
sj)iiil  and  indepeiidence  in  i>\iv  country  to  resist  these  arbitrary  doctrines, 
and  good  sense  enough  to  disci  iminate  between  a  fair  aiul  laudable  attempt 
to  exanvine  impartially  the  conduct  of  the  two  great  belligerent  nuiions, 
and  a  wish  so  often  unjustly  and  illiberally  charged  upon  us,  to  justify  the 
improper  conduct  of  either  of  them. 

If  I'rance  was,  as  Mr.  Maddison  declares,  as  well  justified  as  Great 
Britain  in  making  letaliulion  tl-.rough  neutral  commerce  upon  her  enemy, 
this  right  must  result  from  some  one  of  the  grounds  stated  by  the  late 
committee  of  Coni^icss,  who  appear  to  be  too  nmch  attached  to  I'rance  to 
omit  any  of  her  reasonable  pretension;-.. 

These  grounds  are  staled  to  be, 

I'irst'ii.  The  attack  on  our  riglils  by  Croat  Rritain  hi  imprt'ssiiig'  American 
scaim-n. 

Si'coiul'i'.    'I'he  cxienbion  of  the  rig-lit  of  blockadr. — And, 

Tlurdh!-  The  doctrir.t-  of  cutting'  ott'tlie  culoaial  li'ailc,  more  generally  known 
hy  the  name  ot  the  rule  of  1756. 

With  respect  to  the  two  first,  the  Committee  cf  Cc;igress,  ashamed  t».> 
show  a  (hjwnright  submission  to  I'l'ance,  ha\c!  given  one  answer — 
that  even  if  these  were  wrongs,  they  atVected  principally  ourselves,  and 
were  not  the  subject  of  belligeient  comjdaint.     But  (  veu  ou  iheijc  points 


/ 


/J 


$ 


14 


the  partiality  of  the  Committee  was  obvious,  because  they  iicj^Iected  to 
give  other  answers  which  would  have  been  still  more  conclusive. 

As  to  the  impressment  of  our  seamen,  they  mitj;ht,  and  they  oui;;ht  to 
have  said,  thatCircat  Britain  never  claimed  the  rij^ht  to  take  any  other 
than  her  own  seamen  ; — that  this  was  a  ri.^ht  which  not  only  every  other 
nation,  but  I'rance*  in  an  especial  manner,  had  not  only  claimed  and  exer- 
cised, but  which  she  would  never  yield  ; — that  if  inconvenicnoies  and  in- 
juries to  ourselves  had  arisen  from  this  claim,  they  were  to  be  attributed 
to  very  natural  causes,  the  similarity  of  lanj^uage  and  manners,  the  difii- 
cidty  of  discrimination,  and  the  facility  afforded  by  these  circumstances  to 
the  mariners  of  Great  Britain  to  Hy  her  service,  at  a  time  when  the  law 
of  nature  and  nations  required  their  assistatice,  and  authorized  every  rea- 
sonable measure  of  compulsion  to  secure  it. 

As  to  the  British  orders  of  Ijlockadc,  they  mifi;lit  have  said,  that  the  his- 
tory of  the  present  war  had  ottered  a  new  state  of  things,  in  which  the  vast 
preponderance  of  one  belligerent  on  the  ocean,  the  total  incapacity  of  the 
other  to  enter  the  lists  on  that  field  of  contest,  had  really  changed  the  an- 
cient established  rules ;  or  to  speak  tnorc  correctly,  had  authorized  the 
application  of  those  rules  in  a  more  extensive  manner.  The  whole  doc- 
trine of  blockade  is  founded  upon  the  idea  that  a  belligerent  has  the  power 
so  to  impede  the  trade  of  the  blockaded  port  as  to  render  it  duvgcroun. — 
This  is  the  only  limitation  to  this  power  set  up  by  the  famotis  armed  neu- 
tn.iity  ;  and  the  records  of  our  insurance-offices  will  shew,  that  the  British 
blockades  have  possessed  these  rccjuisites. — It  has  been  almost  impracti- 
calile  at  any  pi-emium  to  hisure  a  vessel  bound  to  any  port  avov  <  dly 
blockaded. 

If  these  honoiutible  gentlemen  had  referred  to  our  former  correspond- 
ence with  France,  they  would  have  fovuid,  that  vuulcr  the  administration  of 
Washington,  both  these  matters  were  fully  discussed  ;  and  as  France  gave 
no  answer  to  them,  biu  afterwards  made  a  treaty  without  any  stipidation 
it  is  fairly  to  be  presumed  that  she  was  conscious  they  were  untenable. 

In  the  answer  of  oiu'  government  to  Mr.  Adet,  on  the  subject  of  im- 
firensmeutK^  our  Secretary  remarks,  "  This,  Sir,  was  a  subject  which  con- 
cerned only  our  government.  As  an  independent  nation  we  were  not 
bovuul  to  render  an  account  to  any  other  of  the  measures  we  deemed 
pioi)er  to  adopt  for  the  protection  of  our  own  citizens." 

An  answer  similar  to  that  was  given  on  the  subject  of  blockade,  to 
wiiich  it  \\ as  added,  that  so  long  as  the  British  Cabinet  on  those  points 
adliered  to  the  law  of  nations,  there  could  be  no  just  cause  of  complaint. 

We  coi  le  then  to  the  doctrine  of  colonial  trade,  upon  which  all  the  ad- 
vocates of  the  present  administration  appear  to  rely,  as  cause  of  justifica- 

*  Sec  tlic  Nouveau  code  dcs  Prises  "Decree  of  the  Khig  in  Cotmcil,  thited 
Aii.u^iist  5th,  1676,  I'cciiiiii^'  that  where  liis  Miijcsly  luid  Issued  a  proclamation 
ordcrini''  all  rrciiclimen  in  the  cnijiluy  ol'  forciq-n  nations  to  return,  mulcr  pain  ot 
de  itli,  it  roniiniitis  the  punislinieiu  to  tliat  of  the  .u;'aileys,"  It  has  Ijccn  cnstoni- 
arv  for  l-'raucc  to  issue  sucli  au  order  hi  cverv  war 


tiol 
crll 
llJ 
coll 
wa| 

of 

thai 
tlu( 
in 
real 

ha  J 

hi- J 


i 


io 


1 


f  nc,u;lected  to 
isive. 

tlicy  oui^ht  to 
take  any  otiicr 
ily  every  ot/ier 
iiecl  and  excr- 
ncics  and  in- 
bc  attributed 
crs,  the  diffi- 
[■unistanccs  to 
A'licn  the  law 
f.c6  every  rca- 

I,  that  the  his- 
ivhirh  the  vast 
apacity  of  the  ' 
mjjed  the  an- 
iithorizcd  the 
ic  whole  doc- 
las  the  power 
davgcroiiti. — 
i  armed  neii- 
at  the  Britisli 
lost  inipi'acti- 
ort  avovedly 

r  corrcspond- 
linistration  of 

I'rancc  g-avc 
»y  stip\dation 
ntenable. 
bject  of  im- 

which  con- 
kve  were  not 

we  deemed 

)Iockade,  to 
hose  points 
oniplaint. 
h  all  the  ad- 
of  justilica- 

iMicil,  ilutecl 
Ji'tjchmiation 
tiller  ])aiii  of 
ecu  cu'-tnin- 


non  lor  the  French  decrees.  This  doctrine  has  been  usually,  but  improp- 
erly, as  we  shall  shew,  envilled  the  rule  of  the  war  of  175fi  :  and  it  is  this, 
that  neutrals  have  no  rit;;lu  to  exercise  or  carry  on  a  trafiic  between  tho 
colonies  (jf  a  b(  lliyerent,  and  the  parent  country  of  such  colonies,  wliicU 
was  interdicted  or  unlawful  prior  to  the  war. 

That  this  is  a  doctrine  enforced  by  Great  Britain,  throu£!;hout  the  whole 
of  the  present  war,  from  1793  to  this  day,  we  do  not  deny  ;  but,  we  say, 
that  Francf  had  no  reason  to  complain  -of  it,  and  did  not  in  fact  make  it 
the  ground  of  her  decrees  of  Ikilinand  Milan,  we  do  solemnly  contend, 
in  opjjosition  to  her  apoloi^ist  and  advocate,  Mr.  Madison,  for  the  foUowint;; 
reasons : — 

Fir.stlij.  Because  France  was  herself  the  author  of  that  principle,  and 
has  never  contradicted  it  in  any  public  act  from  the  moment  in  which  she 
hist  introduced  it. 

On  tiie  twenty-third  day  of  July,  1704,  as  appears  by  the  ordonnanccs  of 
Louis  Xl\  .  commenied  on  by  Valin,  it  was  declared  l)y  France,  "  That  all 
vessels  which  should  have,  or  which  should  thereafter  depart  from  the 
ports  of  an  enemy,  laden  in  vjIioIv  or  in  /lart  witii  any  goods  whatsoever, 
bound  to  any  other  ports  than  those  of  the  coinury  to  which  such  neutral 
vessel  belonyeil,  should  be  declared  good  prize."  "  And  it  was  further 
declared,  that  vessels  boiuul  even  from  a  neutral  pert  to  an  enemy's  port, 
on  board  (;f  which  shoidd  be  found  any  ai'ticles  of  the  growth  or  manufac- 
ture of  an  enemy,  such  articles  should  be  lawful  prize." 

I  forbear  to  (;nter  into  the  other  parts  of  that  ordonnance,  which  vastly 
exceeded,  in  severity,  those  now  cited  ;  because  these  arc  sufficiently 
broad  to  support  the  ride  of  1755  as  against  France. 

The  same  rule  was  still  further  extended  and  enforced  by  France,  in 
1744.  Thus  it  appears,  that  France  first  established  this  rule,  and  en- 
forced it,  more  than  50  years  before  the  British  trilnmals  iniitated  their 
example — and,  therefore,  as  it  relates  to  that  nation,  that  rule  could  not 
be  the  ground  of  just  retaliation. 

Secondly.  This  rule,  if  it  can  i)e  disputed  on  fair  and  honorable  grounds, 
could  not  be  the  foundation  of  complaint  on  the  part  of  France,  because 
the  same  answei"  could  be  gi\en  to  it,  as  was  given  by  our  last  and  even 
the  present  administration,  to  the  complaints  of  France  on  the  subject  of 
impressment,  and  thai  is,  that  it  concerns  ourselves  only  and  our  govern- 
ment, and  is  an  attair  in  which  France  has  no  right  to  interfere — Because 
it  might  be  replied  to  1' ranee,  that  she,  by  standing  and  perpetual  laws, 
interdicts  all  our  trade  with  her  colonies  ; — that  these  laws  are  still  unre- 
pealed, and  are  only  suspended  by  temporary  orders  ; — that  as  she  does 
not  admit  us  to  this  trade  in  time  of  peace,  but  only  in  moments  of  neces- 
sity, we  are  not  bound  to  defend  our  rights  to  this  licensed  and  limited 
traffic,  at  the  moment  when  her  necessities  should  induce  her  to  change 
her  narrow  and  restricted  policy  ; — duit  if  this  hud  been  a  trade  wc  had 
enjoyed  in  peace,  wc  should  be  ready  to  contend  for  it  ;  but  as  it  was  prc- 


*\\ 


r 


J 


iil 


>  16 

'^"^^^^l^^nc^T''''^'^^^^^^  ''^'- Pt^i'sonal  interests  u 

^"<i  Gef.Pt        V   Amidst  (lie  vol,,,,,;      ^'"'^'us  chapo-es  ,„,  i     .     *' ^'  '''»v<' 

'•--'W  ^k!:?  ""'' ""  ^-'^ar^J'^^^  ;-v"-' '-'i voices  cc^^r-^^  ''^>'^  '^- 

t  li,    o,"''^'  ^''^'^  the  ca  n;ir'"^''^'^'  -^-i'^^  sk  '^jr^^  ^"^■-'•ces  by    er 


Ao. 


^:>. 


8S 


•it 


>N.. 


='"csts,H-CM-erf 


n. 


'i 


,   ^^0  have 

''"."t'^  of  Adcu 
'H.plo.  The' 
p'-sejf,  vvhich 

"••CCS  by  ,,ej, 

'^y  i  wc  a„. 
'"'■f-'  during 

'"'ce  jicver 
^  J  and  yef 
J"  short, 
<^''l)inet  or- 
'  ti-adc  is 
'CI-  own 

'■c-estab- 
cl  and  CI,. 

tlic  little 

f'octrine 
s  in  tiii.s 
^  not  tJio 

set  the 

palliai- 

of  our 


:nds 
teni 

or 

of 


17 


comings  his  dccp-rootcd  prejudices.  In  judging,  therefore,  of  the  late 
offers  to  France  and  Gi-eat  Britain,  wo  ought  to  require  and  receive  a 
veiy  high  degree  of  evidence,  before  we  a(lniit,  tliat  Gi-eut  llritain  und 
France  luive  been  treuled  witb  a  toleral)le  share  of  eciuylity. 

In  analyzing  these  cUspatchcs,  I  hold  niyself  bound  to  prove,  that  there  is 
not  only  no  evidence  of  any  such  inipartiulity,  but  that  there  is  proof,  not 
to  be  resist«'d,  that  the  oiVers  were  perfectly  illusory  to  Great  Britain,  und 
so  artfully  arranged  and  deceithdly  ex])ressed  as  that  while  a  rei'usal  ot 
thcni  was  inevitably  foreseen  on  the  part  of  tliat  Court,  they  might  pro- 
duce a  I)elief,  in  the  people  of  this  country,  that  every  reasonable  measure 
had  been  adopted  consistent  with  our  honor. 

The  purport  of  the  President's  declaration  to  Congress,  and  also  of  the 
late  icport  of  the  connviitt'e  to  that  body,  in  relaiion  to  these  offers,  is, 
tliat  tjiere  were  siinultaneous  i)ropositions  nvadeto  the  Courts  of  St.  Cloud 
and  St,  James,  equally  fiir  and  honor.ible  to  both  n.  lions,  and  which  either 
of  tliem  might  have  .icci  ptcd  without  any  derogation  to  its  honor. 

\Vt  imdertake  to  prove,  that  these  ofiers  were  unequal,  unjust  ;  and 
were  made  nnder  circumstances  which  rendered  it  impossible  they  could 
be  accepted  In'  o?Jr  of  iheni.  The  field  upon  which  I  am  now  entering  is 
■  a  vchif  one  ;  it  calls  for  great  patience  in  llie  investigation,  huismuch  as  it 
is  no  trilling  task  to  trace  t!ie  doublings  and  windini^s  of  cunning  poUti- 
cians,  who  have  devoted  their  whole  lives  to  Machiavelian  politics — But 
the  reward  will  be  equal  to  the  labor  ;  the  magnitude  and  importvUice  of 
the  subject  not  only  justify  but  demand  some  sacrihccs  of  our  ease.  If 
our  rulers  have  honestly  and  sincerely  attempted  to  rescue  us  from  the 
evils  into  which  their  former  errors  had  plunged  us,  let  them  receive 
the  praise  which  they  merit  ;  but  if  instead  of  attempting  to  procure  us 
relief,  they  have  continued  to  pursue  the  same  destructive  and  wayward 
policy  which  has  brought  us  to  the  verge  of  ruin,  let  them  find  their  pun- 
ishment in  the  contempt  and  indignation  of  an  injured  people. 

The  first  remark  I  shall  make  upon  the  documents  lately  published  in 
relation  to  the  offers  made  to  France  and  Great  Britan,  for  the  rep(;al  of 
their  respective  edicts,  is  this,  that  while  all  the  correspondence  between 
Mr.  I'inckney  and  Mr.  Canning,  and  between  our  minister  in  London  and 
Mr.  Madison,  is  made  known,  nut  one  line  of  the  correspondence,  or  re- 
monstrances, or  offers  of  Mr.  Armstrong  to  the  French  Cabinet,  on  the 
subject  of  their  decrees,  is  given  to  tiie  public,  unless  the  letter  of  Gen. 
Annstrong,  so  late  as  August  Cih,  1808,  to  iMonsieur  Champagny,  be 
considered  as  of  this  description. — But  I  do  not  consider  that  this  lettei- 
contains  tlie  offers  transmitted  to  France,  because  there  is  no  proposition 
to  rescind  the  dccrcen  ;  and  because  it  docs  not  comport  with  the  positive 
instructions  given  to  iNIr.  Armstrong,  which  wei-e  to  offer  to  France  a 
declaration  of  war  against  Cireat  Britain,  as  an  equivalent  for  her  removal 
of  the  Flmbargo. — This  letter  of  Gen.  Armstrong  is  to  be  sure  sufRcient- 
1v  disgrace fuh  and  is  entitled  to  and  will  receive  a  most  ample  examina- 


I* 


w 


■  *~ 


,tj!-«.^» 


:-/.,- 


n 


L 


18 

t<Jiu!itions,  so   h-.n.iJ.     1  ^-'^  "''"It-  to(;iv..,  n,.:,  V  '-•""<-«  to  trance, 

•iVroW/v.  'n,  ;  om  ,.     ,  .  ,  '''  ''"^"'»  «  could 

'^•''  should  not  1-   ,    ii"      -T'  '  ^•'•^•^'t  Britain,  in     .so    f     ""/ "'  o^'f'-^'eous 
"^e  extravaL^a  ,a^   ;      •'''"•^''•^'^^-  J'^'<-.s.-,Sta  t  e  n'.f  r^n'^'^'^  "^"^'^^  'at- 

;•-  r;^''"''---  u^k-r^rr '  •  '^''^  i-^^i.'  ;."  n,^^^'  t^^-  - 

'enfold  greatcT  tlntn         ,  n       ""i^  •"''^"^'-  to  rm,-  and  ch,  '    .  T"^  '^"""^- 

^hci-c  IS  to  be  sure  nf>  ..     ,.  "'""'  '"^'  ^*"^t''  itself'     '  ^''- 

our  offer-it  co  I      ^'' '^'^''i<^d  in  ^,.or  T f^^^^  "^"'''  '»ake  it 

••-enabled  before     an^M  ^'""•^'^'^^  "^"^  i  to  1   t^^.^'';^ ''  ^'^^'  ^''ould  accem 

.1  '•"•  >W-s  „or<l  .<  ™4„„„  „  °  ^""«'  ^■•'tes  and  j,, 

"''"'  "^y  "ic  letter  of  M 


I 


1 


^t9»*.^ 


f 


4 


tilut    Mi(j, 

[■"  ofthviv 
Hf  retv  ; 

^t  CO(|J(f 

[make  to 

'<^  cniis 
''cnder- 
»icd  or 

'•.?e  in 
ncc,  it 
'"iiuin. 
rong, 

^nt  to 

•''  en- 
•  an  j 
i  ad. 


and 
iie 
as 

n 
y 


\y 


Champap;ny,  sot  only  iifftod  us  to  irar,  in  ex/nra.H  terms,  hut  hud  deil.ii 
C(i  lor  our  rahiiu't,  and  |K-()[)k.,  that  \vc  were  at  irur  arUudly  wiili  (iif.u 
Biit:tiii. — It  was  It)  tins  maiiifrttation  ol"  the  desire  of  France,  thai  Mr. 
M^idison  und()ui)tcdly  referred. 

But  in  order  tliai  no  doul)l  n\iii;ht  hani^  over  the  intentions  of  tiK;  },'ov- 
ernment,  to  oHer  an  idlianre  ofl'ensive  and  defensive  to  France,  as  u  con- 
dition of  the  repeal  of  her  decrees,  Mr.  Madison  adds  in  the  same  letter, 

"  Oil  tlic  otlicr  hand,  should  she  (Franco)  stt  the  example  of  rc\  oration,  (iriM 
nritaiii  vciilil  be  obliniil,  eitJKT  by  fiiliowin.tf  it,  to  restore  to  France  the  f';r.l 
benel't  of  milt  ral  trade,  whic'li  slie  needs,  or  by  pcrse\ering'  in  her  oljnoxioiis 
orders,  at'ler  tlie  prcie.\i  tor  them  had  cea!>ed,to  vendfv  i-nllininiu  with  ilw  L',u:rJ 
States  iiitvilafjU'."' 

Novv  as  Mr.  Arnistronir  was  dii-crted  to  lU'ge  this  art^ument  iii>on 
I'rance,  and  as  we  had  a  partial  non-importation  act  in  force  ai>;ainst  Gica' 
Britain,  and  a  still  more  hostile  measure  in  the  interdiction  of  her  puhlic 
ships,  it  was  a  direct  otter  tr)  France  of  eni^a^insi;  in  th(^  war  upon  l!>e 
condition  therein  expressed.  Unless,  therefore,  it  is  avowed,  that  the 
offer  was  innincrrr,  Mr.  Jett'erson  must  have  pledged  the  peace  of  the 
country,  and  placed  it  at  ih.e  disjxisal  of  France.  If  other  proofs  vere 
wantins^'  of  the  positive  nature  of  thi:->  otVci',  tluy  <  an  he  found  in  the  fol- 
lowinijf  extract  of  Mi.  MadisoiTs  letter  to  Mr.  Pint  kncy,  of  April  ;)0,  1808, 
in  which  he  has  unwarily  druppetl  his  ntetaphoiu  al  expressions  : 

"Should  tlie  French  j^oveninieiit  revoke  .vo  nj(,r//  of  its  dervees  :">  \iohite  o'lv 
neutral  rig'hls,  or  .tfive  txplt.iuni'jiis  ami  ussiirmicru  1ki\ Inj^  the  like  eHecl,  atul  ei'.- 
titlinj^  it  therefore  to  the  removal  of  the  embarg'o,  as  it  applies  to  I'rance,  it  will 
()e  IMPOSSIBLE  to  view  a  pirs..  verance  ofCircat  Hritaiii  in  lier  retaliatory  order-- 
in  any  other  light  than  tliat  of  \v.\ii." 

Here,  then,  is  a  /irccious  proof  of  ini]>artialily.  To  Great  Britain  Mr. 
Jefferson  says, 

"  Repeal  all  your  orders — repeal  them  in  totiihin  vcvhi-,  (and  as  we  sIltII  shew 
by  and  hv)  with  the  sterik,  iia\  insultinic  offer  of  sim|)l_\  placiiit;'  lier  on  the  foot- 
ing' in  whitii  slie  stoixl  at  the  moment  they  were  Issued,  oil  the  simple  condition 
of  withdrawing' our  embarg'o,  which  l'ori?u'd /lo  jiart  of  tlii motives  for  issuin.^ 
;hcm." 

Btit  to  the  Great  Emperor  of  France,  our  good  friend  and  ally,  who 
!)urns,  sinks,  seizes,  confiscates,  and  destroys  at  his  good  pleasure,  the 
property  of  hoth  friends  and  foes,  he  mildly  says, 

"  IJepeal  or  rescind  so  much  only  of  jour  decrees  as  relates  to  us,  or  n'ive  as- 
nrnntfn  and    explamuiuns  to   the  like  eifect,   ami   wc   will   tleclare  11  cr  acj-uiti.-it 
your  enemy." 

What  I  when  the  fifrfidiou.s-  vioktion  of  the  cisfiiiraJices  of  Dcci  es,  as  to 
the  French  orders,  was  at  that  moMkt  visible  in  the  seizure  of  oin-  ships 
and  cargoes  at  Antwerp,  and  throu^out  tlie  continent  of  Europe  ;  when 
u  solcuui  treaty  made  by  this  Empefor  him.;!  If.  ws  hotirly  and  liahituaiiy 


^\\ 


Vi 


I 


} 


ll 


20 


cJ 


,    '^  't  credible,  tlr.f  ..     ,     ,  ''"'••  ''"x^  is  toui       " 


li 


.,-!;*-?c. 


*^.-^is  c" 


ii/idutioi, 
ii.ulc . 

'  ''ioilf. 

''<•  cnr- 
"'  that 


•21 


We  have  also  assij};necl  a  prcat  vaiiity  of  n-usons  to  show  tlvat  Ciicui 
fliitiiii)  dfsi'i'vcd  «/ Ar/sY  iis  much  faxour  iil  oui'  h»>r.(ls,  her  onlcis  luiviiij^ 
been  .-ii (0)1(1  in  puini  ol  time,  colouialjle  ut  least  hi  puuit  of  reiali  iiion,  less 
extensive  and  iinprineiplcd  in  their  terms,  not  ehaij;ed  like  the  others 
with  a  perfKlioiis  hreuc  h  of  ticaty,  not  issued,  like  those  of  hercntiny, 
a}i;ainsl  a  suhniissive  and  eoniphini;-  friend,  but  oiJeratiuL;;  against  one  who 
had  assiiued  a  hostile  attitude,  and  v.  ho  was  thi(  iteninj^  actual  v.'ar. 

So  iar,  how  e\er,  were  Mr.  JeiVerson's  offers  from  beinj;  imp.irti.l  to  the 
two  helii^eictits,  that  to  CJreat  Uiitain.  in  lieu  of  the  suhstaiwial  otVer  of 
TMV  ai!;;anst  her  enemy,  in  case,  she  should  repeal  hrr  orders,  .iwA  her  ene- 
my should  lefiise  to  rescind  liis,  he  simply  offered  to  reiJcal  our  etnbaryo, 
and  intimated,  in  tcrnn.  i'j<,  /oosr  tt)  produce  any  confidence,  that  he  might 
leave  the  emhai^c;  to  operate  against  1  ranee. 

That  he  did  not  otter  toCircatBrituin, as  he  did  to  Trance, a imr  with  its 
enemy,  would  be  apparent  to  every  reflecting  man,  from  two  vunrlusive 
considerations,  indepeudeiit  of  the  evidence  I  shall  presently  cite  from  the 
dispatches.  ^ 

/ur,tf/i/.  It  is  impossible  that  CJ»eat  Britain  should  not  ha\e  accepted  the 
fiflcr. — A  war  on  our  side  against  !•' ranee  would  not  only  have  perfidly 
fulfilled  the  whole  object  of  the  British  orders,  but  by  renderuig  the  block- 
ade of  the  I'reiu  h  ports  totally  unnecessary,  it  would  have  relieved  Ctreat 
Hritain  from  vast  eNjjense,  and  have  liberated  her  forces  for  other  ob- 
lects. — Our  aid  too,  though  small  compared  to  her  own  vast  power,  would 
have  been  extremely  convenient  to  her,  and  tin:  monopoly  which  such  a 
war  would  produce  of  all  our  commerce  would  lutve  been  of  vast  advan- 
tage to  her  power.  Besides,  as  no  maritime  nation  but  tJic  United  States 
was  7icut.raU  the  orders  themselves  would  have  been  virtually  repealed  by 
our  embarking  in  the  war,  since  shethd  not  re(|uire  those  orders  to  enable 
her  to  capture,  all  the  ships  of  her  enemies,  .md  her  allies  could  fia\  e  no 
trade  with  France. 

ticcondly.  The  letter  of  Mr.  Canning  to  Mr.  Pinckney,  of  September 
23d,  1808,  proves  that  Great  Britidn  understood  both  Mr.  Piiickney's 
verbal  and  written  offers,  in  this  light;  for  he  evidently  answers  these 
oflers  on  the  ground  that  they  extended  t^'jlrlu  to  the  removal  of  our  em- 
bargo, which,  if  intended  as  a  measure  of  iinpaitial  hostility,  he  remarks 
was  w;7;7/.v^  as  Trance  was  the  aggressor,  and  (iieat  Britain  would  not 
consent  to  buy  off  our  unjust  hostility,  by  withdrawing  a  measure  aimed 
not  at  us,  but  at  her  enemy,  Prance. 

Thirdly.  That  our  government  understood  their  own  of^er  in  this  light, 
is  evident  from  the  following  unanswercibh;  clause  in  the  letter  of  Mr. 
Madison,  of  July  IS,  1808,  to  Mr.  Pinckney  :-- 

"  It  will  be  difti'iih  therefore  to  conceive  any  motive  in  Great  Hntain  to  rejccf 
the  offer  you  will  lune  made,  other  than  the  iiope  of  iiuhiciii:;-,  on  tlie  \y.\\\  of 
France,  a'pcrsevertinre  in  her  irritt.tinq-  policy  tow arda  the  Luiltd  Slatcy,  iuid  O" 
the  part  ot'tlie  laltcrj  ho'stik  raatiments  iigiuiist  it.'' 


;*i 


\ 


^,:^ 


/ 


«>  ruse  tl.,.  I'.':;  "•  ;"'"/>'  -/.  I,„      ,''""  "'="  s/,c  iKul  n  ,  '  ^^  ^V'  ^""''i" 


'^'»'  ""  the  SUM       '•'."-'^'^"'■K  tin,;    "    "-^^*=^"'-ATiov  tZ  ;r    ,.  '"'^Jccl 


;incf 
\- 

so/- 
■sucJi 


.3     ! 


•^  ■^-  -iK    — 


■'"\_., 


^3"— ~- 


i 


f 


'■^  "  fondi. 
""••rid,  i„ 

"'"■'"//i  or 
"isli  to 


'cav( 


piool's  d'  our  (liipli(  it) ,  and  n\ir  desire  lo  avoid  a  I'l  londly  scttlomoiit,  if 
she  distrusted  the  \ery  viii^iu;  and  ridiculously  loose  ex[)rcssi(jiis  of  the 
lorei^oiiij^  inslru(  liuiis. 

Nor  is  this  all. — The  dispatch  of  Mr.  Madison,  of  April  .loth,  niust  he 
considered  as  huviniijheeM  (pialihed  and  restrained  hy  the  ii;enerai  and  posi 
li\e  ternisot  that  niinisit  r's  letter  f)t  the  Ith  olApril,  in  the  same  year,  in 
which  he  tells  Mr.  Pinkiuy,  that  ir(ireal-Hritain  should  w'nhout  (■jndi/ion, 
revoke  her  orders,  still  w  hile  the  aHair  of  the  ('//ca7///((/Xc  remained  lai- 
rifiiuiril,,  he  was  not  lo  "pledge  our  j^overmnent  to  consider  the  repeal 
*'  (d'the  orders  as  a  i^round  on  \\lii(  h  a  removal  hf  thr  rjis'iiii--  rcstricli'jns 
"  on  the  commerce  ot  ihc  United  Slates  with  (Ireat-Hiiudn  wcndd  he 
"  justly   expt  cted." 

It"  then  this  li  tier,  written  only  iwenty-four  days  hi  lore,  he  considci-ed 
as  a  pari  of  the  instructions,  and  it  was  never  counleiniandid,  it  nmst  he 
so  considered,  thai  even  ihe  illusory  and  irilVmi;- oHir  made  toOreat- 
llritain,  was  accompanied  with  a  condition  which  it  was  known  woidd 
never  be,  and  indeed  could  ntvrr  be  accepted. 

The  removal  of  om'  restrictions,  of  which  the  l'".mbart;;o  was  one,  was 
to  depend  on  (ireal  IJrilain's  makint^  a  due  eypiation  to  Mr.  JelVerson  for 
the  attack,  the  ;<;;aulh(jrised  attack,  f)n  the  C7i<  sd/inikc. — This  covild 
never  be  done,  and  Mr.  Jett'erson  knew  it,  and  therefore  knew  that  his 
ofl'er  could  never  be  accepted. —  He(  ause  no  terms  which  (Ireat  Hritaiii 
could  otter,  would  e\er  be  accei)lal)lc  lo  the  President  of  the  United 
ijtates,  so  lonp;  as  they  would  not  be  acceptable  to  I'rance. 

Our  government,  by  violating  the  law  and  thai  (lecorinri  hitherto  prf- 
scrved  among  nations,  in  taking  its  own  revenge  into  its  own  hands,  had 
renderctl  il  impossible  ihatClreal  liriUiin  coidd  ever  give  us  satisfaction, 
iinlil  those  measures  of  self-satisfaction  and  revenge  wen;  repealed. 
On  the  other  hand,  by  absolutely  refusing  to  repeal  those  measmx's,  and 
thus  to  receive  the  oflers  of  rejjaration,  tendered  by  a  solemn  embassy, 
it  had  rendered  the  settlement  of  the  attair  of  the  C/ifsu/icukc  impossible, 
until  Great  liritain  should  be  actually  conquered  iiy  (nir  arms  or  restric- 
tive energies,  an  event  improbable  so  long  as  lionapavte  is  inadequate 
to  that  object. 

Mr.  Jett'erson,  knowing  all  these  facts,  was  assuied  that  he  might  safe- 
ly make  any  otter  to  Cireat  Britain,  so  long  as  he  coupled  it  with  his  in- 
admissible pretensions,  and  bis  diplomatic  quibbles  in  the  attair  of  tho 
C/icna/tcakc. 

The  subject  of  the  otters  to  Great  Britain  might  be  rested  on  this 
simple,  but,  we  think,  unanswerable  view.  Still,  however,  as  it  is  all- 
important  to  shew  the  false  and  insidious  policy  of  our  cabinet — a  policy 
which  is  the  sole  cause  of  uU  o\u'  troubles,  I  shidl  devote,  ta  it  one 
other  number. 


*\\ 


\ 


f: 


i-H 


i      i' 


it 


f 


25 


m 


■■'t  liri 


t.ii'n 


'"^'   CO,,. 

r"'-em- 

"Id 
fees 


fier 


»Cf/ 


'« 


^   V/,, 

ail]  ; 


honour.  It  uas  then  ini]n'acticable,  impossible  for  her  to  accept  our 
offer  ;  and,  ol  necessity,  afirontive  on  our  pait  to  ask  it,  upon  such  con- 
ditions. 

Sfcovdhj.  Thi:  offer  to  Great  Britain  was  ajfrontive^  as  well  as  dc^stitute 
of  reciprocity.  It  was  not  only  asking;  her  to  humble  herself  before  her 
haiii;;hty  rival ;  and,  in  that  view  we  acted  as  allies  on  the  side  of  I'rance  ; 
it  was  not  only  dcmaiuUns;  of  her  to  concede  somethins^  to  us,  but  infinite-^ 
ly  more  to  her  enemy — but  it  is  not  to  be  disij;uised,  and  I  sec  no  reason 
for  keeping  the  scciet,  the  otter  was  intended  to  humble  Great  Britain 
before  u^.  Tiiere  is  no  man  in  the  United  States,  however  weak  may  be 
his  vinderstandinj:^-,  who  does  not  coniprehend  the  real  policy  of  the  em- 
bargo, which  tin-  transparent  veil  thrown  over  it  in  debate  and  diplomatic 
prorcedin:j,s  does  not  hide,  but  only  exat^gerates.  The  language  of  the 
adiiiinistratiijn,  their  well  known  character,  the  prohii)ition  of  exportation 
by  land,  tlie  declaration  of  uisurrection  against  the  inhabitants  of  Ver- 
mont, the  hostility  avowed  by  all  tiie  friends  of  our  government  to  Great 
Britain,  the  constant  apologies  and  indulgcncics  to  France  ;  all  speak  a 
lariguage  too  intelligible  to  be  mistaken — a  language  as  well  ii;?derstood 
in  thf  cabinet  of  St.  James,  as  in  the  conclave  composed  of  Mr.  Jehbrson, 
Mr.  Madison,  and  the  rc])resentative  of  his  Imperial  Majesty  ; — w  lan- 
guage which  Ml-.  Canning  chooses  \>,  let  us  know  he  fully  understands 
iuid  feels,  though  with  the  smooth  politeness  of  diplomatic  forms  it  is  de- 
corously disguised.  I  say,  that  the  otter  was  aflVontive  to  Great  Britain, 
because  there  is  not  a  man  ui  the  United  States  who  does  not  feel,  that 
liad  she  yirldrd  to  our  claims,  it  would  have  l)een  pronounced,  and  exull- 
ingly  eclujcd,  even  in  the  hall  of  Congress,  as  a  viciorij  over  an  ciicunj — . 
a  victory,  which  would  liavc  given  as  sincere  pleasure  at  St.  Cloud  as  al: 
Waslungton. 

Tldrdlij.  Tlu'  two  last  ideas  naturally  lead  us  to  consider  our  otter  as 
mean,  inconsistent  and  hypociltical.  It  was //»■«;/,  because  Mr.  Madison, 
in  his  letter  of  December  2od,  1807,  directly  contrary  to  what  every  man 
knew  to  be  the  fact,  directs  Mr.  Pinckncy  to  assure  the  British  govern- 
ment, that  the  enil)argo  was  a  measure  ''  neither  hostile  in  its  character, 
*'  nor- justifying,  uniting  or  leaduig  to  hostility  with  any  nation  whatever." 
It  was  however  at  that  moment  reconnnended  in  a  newspaper  paragr.iph, 
supposed  to  be  written  by  the  President  himself  or  Mr.  Madison,  as  a 
Htroiiii;^  iijcrcivr  measure.  It  was  inconisifitent^  because  the  very  otter 
made  to  Great  Britain  in  itself  implied,  that  the  embargo  was  a  /'.'j.stilc 
measiue,  operating  severely  upon  her,  and  to  remove  which  she  would 
be  induced  to  abandon  her  whole  course  of  measures  against  her  enemy, 
to  admit  that  she  was  coiupiered,  and  that  too  by  the  "  j'cstrictlva  enei'- 
gies  "  of  .\merica.  How  cnnj  nihiister  could  pen  such  a  proposal,  alter 
the  first  solenui  declaration,  I  cannot  conceive  ;  and  it  will  be  still  more 
astonishing  if  every  honest  and  virtuous  American  does  not  'ulush  for  the 
protli^rate  lueaitcss  of  such  public  agents. 


i 


/ 


// 


< 


.  'J 


i<. 


2b 


_P>in.sl,„,e„,  oAhTj;'^,^!'™"!''  perish.    ArH^^Tfo,"?.''"""''  ''We 

J:.^  <^uj"se  and 


,^ 


-^-  cabinet  of  6V.  y«;,,7  1, r"''"''^''^^^^^"'h^dI.ove  r  .7/'"^^^ 
^"-•e  considerable       at  conSn'^  "^  "^  -P^-atiin^^'S-^i^^"  J^^e  condt  a 

ra  .net.  ^'>  'eiataon  to  ti.e  Proi^^ ^^/^--^r  ;^ 

^^  ^  '»;'y  periiaps  be  asked    .         •  '^'^  ^''^^ent 


\ 


V 


Pt  lo  prove, 

c  upon  the 
ur  upwards 
,  t^e  head 
'V'?softhe 

3"id  hide 
="''se  and 
the  sect- 
SJit,  and 

^*»&  and 
"in  four 

enemy, 
snt,  be. 

he  told 
o  keep 
treated 
iciJsof 
n  used 
^justi- 
rcsist- 
e  sub- 
'■ation 
^  the 
iduct 
Here 
nisJi 
y  an 
ints, 
ibJe 

'eat 

ide 

■so 

nd 

nt 

3r 


27 

To  Ihb  H-^^^^^:;:!  ' bi^ados,  we  were  n.     e^  .^  . 
that  not  ^vuhstunamy^u     ^^^^^  ^^^  f  ^'^Vit  uoth  "^  ^^^^  ^"'^^■^>'  '°"  f,  to 

restiictlon.,  and    '"^^^^^     ,t,etly  iUusory  ^''\^  ^^^^^^^  '^^^^^  apparently  solcn  n 

HoNV  then,  u  may  be -U^;  ^^.jji^ercnts  ^---^^  c  ^    .^^^^^^  enlis^^tened 
and  serious  oflers  to  the  t^^  i^^^iou  ot  that  -t\''"  •    ^^.e  Senate,  upuu 

ed  to   '^d^P^  '^'Vr'^n^  b      -.s  late  esccllcnt  specd^t  ^^^^^^   j^, 

nati-k)t,CobnelPKkcrvni^,  »  ^^^  ^^^^  cndiarp-  ^^f,'^"\vavxvavd  policy 

time  existed  ;-not»°J^         i,,  the  face  o^  ^^^^        ^^^  reasons  on  ^vhlch 
not  known,  ^^^t  as  ^^^^^^^^^^^  „f  ^he  argument  oio^  ^         fo,,^ed  any  part 

V'  i80r,  to  Mr-  P"^^*'"Vv.,Hro  were  explained  m  tn  ^  -^^  inered- 

£uhe  reason,  to.  0;ce-^;>i°;,,,,  7^-;;;  -  ^  hToun  *=  -tive^ 

convictions.   N>  c  ^'^ 


1 


28 

i<hd  u'c  arc  at  lil 

"'\'7^-'?fPe,-„m  it.        ''^""'^  "«  ioager  b.  ;„    ij!*;,  '"".'P^'-t  of  that 
^  he  letter  of  M,.  civ.,..  ^  '''"'^^'  "  "uld 

.    ^^ liat  then  was  to  hi  ,i         '''  "'  '""•  «"vei'„niem  of  this 

her  orders.     To  1.,    ''""^  '-I^ither  to  resist  r, 

rirn^       j^^^  ^vc  do  not  ?','^  '"^  J^''«'^^t^  ^'''Peror  the  f.i',e«t 

'^"fl  guides  the  aZ.-rr     ""'  ''^'"^ficen    Pr  ?  i  .     "^"'^'>'-^ '-^'n^ain  undc 
2,»^.i  overturns  the  cuef '"'"'  "'^^  ^''■^^'PpoVus        ?'•  ''^'^  batches  o^; 

^,^i."t  the  proofs  of  Se  If  '    •'  ''"'f"^'  i^'"of  of  niTf  w  '     '^   '"'  ^'^^''^'^d 
ministration,  are  on  vnl    7''^^^'''^  t'ian  and  exer.  ■  l.i       "'•'  ""'^  Pi'otcction 

,    ^^"-ucL^,!  >^?';-Vs  more  justf  wHl^  te'S^n^^i'""'  ^""^^'"--t 
be  asked,  how  uc  accoi  m    ""i!^""'  ""^'  P'^'^cy  of  M."'     «• "'  '"'''^""'Pense. 

'     ■'"c  ^'«wc  wiuchin/Iuenccp. 


IV 

ht 
ly 
is 
fl( 
h; 

Si 

li 


f 


i 


>l' 


il'^tcd,  as 
f''  "as  i-e- 
h  or  (hat 
fee  HouJcl 

l/'/y  n-ifj, 
'I  stride; 

iiun  act- 

"  open 

"'•  cm. 
^t'ctetl 
"ictori- 
niei-ce 
tended 
i^y,  or 
•  I^er- 
cii-est 

'  t/iat 
ostii- 

ludc- 

OVQV 

dug, 
I'eitt 

•'P 
fed 
>n, 
ri- 
ll t 

y 
> 


29 


Iloiiapnite  to  dccUire  himself  the  friend  of  the  freedom  of  the  seas,  when 
he  violates  that  freedom  at  every  hreatii : — The  same  Avhich  induces  that 
tyrant  to  propose  peace,  when  he  knows  tiiat  war  is  necessary  to  his  ex- 
istence, and  that  a  real  state  of  peace  would  be  his  destr^iction. — It  is  to 
deceive  and  silence  the  clamours  of  f/ir  /ica///f.  Knowinpj  that  the  em- 
burL'o  was  a  most  dreadful  scourge,  and  would  be  resisted,  it  was  neces- 
sary to  M;et  up  a  son  of  theatrical  larcc,  which  would  make  the  people  be- 
lieve, he  was  really  desirous  of  relieviiit?  them.  But  we  liope  that  the 
cataN/ro/i/ic  will  be  subversive  of  his  ambitious  \iews  and  dcsis^ns. 


No.  8, 

The  indecent  parfialt'/j/  of  r.VNGiAriE  used  toicards  flu:  Bdli>^crcnls  ;  and 
some  rcjlcctions  on  (he  iiigji  ?i:.Nsr.  or  honor  so  much  boasted  of  by 
our  Administration, 

A  CANDID  review  of  tlie  styh^,  temper,  and  lanrruage  adopted 
towards  France  and  Great- Urituin,  will  readily  convince  every  impar- 
<ial  and  virtuous  man,  that  we  owe  all  o\ir  evils  to  the  prejudices  of  our 
cal)iiu<t  in  favor  of  France,  and  their  malignant  antipathy  to  Emrlund ; 
that  if  the  negotiation  with  th(>  latter  had  l)een  as  sincere  as  with  the  for- 
mer ;  if  as  strong  a  desire  had  been  shewn  to  preserve  peace  with  Great- 
Briiain  as  with  France,  we  slioiild  have  been  at  this  moment  enjoying 
that  uninterrupted  prosperity,  of  which  Mr.  JiFFr.uso.v  speaks  in  his 
late  address,  and  to  which  his  etiorts  have  been  at  eviry  period  hostile. 

A  thorough  analysis  of  the  late  di>;pa(ches  will  prove,  that  Mr.  Jef- 
FF.HSON  and  Mr  Madisov,  areas  devoted  to  the  policy  of  France,  as 
they  were  when  they  opposed  Wamiington's  proclamation  of  neutrali- 
ty ;  when  they  had  the  confidential  ear  of  Cknet  and  Falchet  ;  when 
they  privately  countenanced  an  opposition  (o  the  measures  of  our  rulers, 
in  one  of  the  most  eventful  pt  riods  of  our  history. 

We  shall  contrast,  in  t!ie  present  display,  some  few,,  but  striking  in- 
stances of  the  ditferouce  in  the  tone  and  temper  of  our  cabinet,  towards 
Great-lirifain  ami  France. 

Wo  shall  begin  with  the  remonstrances  on  their  several  blockading  or- 
ders. It  must  be  again  remembered,  that  in  this  warfare  France  set  the 
example.  Grcat-liritain  gave  formal  notice  of  her  determination  to  re- 
taliate, unless  we  should  shew  sonu'.  signs  of  resistance. — France  was 
bound  to  us  by  treaty^  :  Greut-liritaiii  by  none. — Towards  the  former, 
then,  our  complaints  ought  to  have  been  most  loud,  and  most  severe. 

lloic  isjhe'ivs^i  ? 


\i 


t 


\ 


i  * 


•io 

^''e  French  iI(3creos  u-       • 

J807,  /.ec/iooses  to  nr  ^^finrsov  <o    Mr     a 

*oexecufe  (heir  Ir  "'"'' ''''-^t  <'.e  Fr,„  l  ^"wstuoxg    of  /If 

O'^-positiOM  (o  LHvc  thp/      .^'"''^^^''or  hinisHf      T^  *  '^'*''   to  hear  nf 

C".n.<„„  r:r;ei:„':  „""  ■»°--'.  «.;"="  t;""'"-  -,,  :;:;■;«" 


It  i.n,    •  "'"'"gaiid  insidi 

of  the  Freripf.  ir  'P^"'sh  order.    :     •    .  *^"^"  d<'crces  •   anr?    r    .  "^ 

^f «,  more  tharfrr^r.^'"".^  ^''^'  '^mpor  ^^7  '""  ^''-^  ^^  Gen 
^'>^^»  our  „,|„i,t^.^  ""^  ^^»  month,  after  the  ckto    r  ..""«"'  ""til  /Vd    s' 
'^ff"'^tion,  thatdcc rco  "'  ""''^  "''"^'^^ing  tha  '  ^  ""^ '''.'^  ®^^^>^  decree       ' 
Postu/ationsas   toirr     ^'""'"^'■^^fio.f  anh^'^^^^^^^     ««  a  n,unici;;i 

*^''ed  as  a  iieutril  «».•   \  "'^""•»'  ''•^'its  ?"  r?    '"'  '"•^^arded  as  an  mfr-.nT 

«e  ha,  sent  them  «„dor 


t 


31 


7^  "OJicX- 


\thc 
th 


}  'II ore 


^omon. 

/.  ^%, 

^Ae  e.Y. 
hear  of 

Vch  t/e_ 

['"ring 

oiir 

'1  of 

'once 


the  faifh  of  the  law  of  nations,  as  solemn  and  saciod  as  that  of  (he  poor, 
and  oppressed,  and  insulted  country,  whose  territory  is  violated? 

(n  Leghorn  and  JIamhti/g,  (it  is  known  to  Mr.  Madison)  the  sei- 
zures were  not  the  acts  of  the  immediate  governments  of  those  places, 
but  the  direct  military  execution  of  French  decrees  in  places  in  which, 
by  the  laws  of  nations,  they  were  forbidden  to  execute  them. — In  place, 
therefore,  of  the  snivelling,  and  almost  treacherous  language  "  of  fiiend. 
ly  expostulations  as  to //ifo/' and  v«(/</eH«c,s>v,"  we  ought  to  have  made 
the  Imperial  palace  ring  with  our  remonstrances  of  violation  of  our  own 
rights,  through  the  most  unparalleled  attacks  on  the  territorial  sove- 
reignty of  other  independent  states.  Not  content  with  this  base  deser- 
tion of  our  honorable  claims,  Mr.  Madison,  in  this  letter  of  Februan/y 
1808,  appeals  to  the  policy  of  France,  and  endeavours  to  show  her  that 
it  is  against  her  interest  to  attack  vur  I'ights,  because  her  enemy,  being 
stronger  on  the  ocean,  will  beat  her  at  this  warfare. 

If  we  had  not  seen  an  example  of  this  humiliation  in  our  minister   to 
Franu:^  in  1793,  we  should  have  questioned  the  evidence  of  our  senses. 

The  last  remark  on  the  language  of  our  cabinet  as  to  these  detestable 
decrees,  is  this,  thatafter  giving  both  to  Mr.  Aumstiiong  and  Mr.  Pinck- 
NEY,  an  apology  which  Mr.  Madison  j'rames  bcfurehand  for  France^ 
and  which  he  puts  into  the  mouths  of  their  ministers  before  they  adopted 
it  themselves,  that  J''y«««;  could  and  would  justify  her  decrees  on  the 
grounds  of  retaliation,  which  he  pronounces  she  can  justtjj  do  ;  this 
glorious  and  independent  minister  of  state,  is  so  afraid  that  his  mild  re- 
monstrances, justifying  in  (he  outset  the  French  decrees  as  viunicipul  re. 
gidattuns,  proceeding  afterwards  simply  to  shew  their  impolicy,  and  (i. 
nally  concluding  with  declaring  their  absolute  justice  as  retaliatory  mea- 
sures, would  be  esteemed  by  France  too  harsh  and  severe,  that  he  cau- 
tions Mr.  Armstrong  in  these  words,  "  In  every  view  it  is  evidently 
"  proper  as  far  as  respect  to  the  national  honor  will  allow,  to  avoid  a 
"  style  of  procedure  which  might  cooperate  with  the  policy  of  the  Bri- 
*'  tish  government  hy  stivnilating  the  passions  of  the  French."  In  oth- 
er  words,  "  wounded,  insulted,  and  abused  as  we  are  by  the  perfidious 
"•  breach  of  treaty,  as  well  as  the  shameless  violation  of  National  Law, 
"  be  careful  lest  in  (he  manner  of  your  stating  our  wrongs,  you  offend 
"  the  haughty  pride  of  our  insolent  oppressor." — Language  is  inadequate 
io  convey  an  idea  of  this  baseness.  We  shall  only  remark  here,  that 
there  is  no  correspondent  caution  to  avoid  oft'ending  Greut-Jirituin  :., 
Her  resentment  is  to  be  sought  rather  than  deprecated. 

Let  us  now  examine  the  language  of  our  pretcndedly  impartial  cabinet 
towards  Grcnt-Britain,  on  (he  subject  of  her  orders — orders  purporting 
to  be  simply  retaliatory — orders  issued  after  due  and  honorable  notice — 
orders  which  did  not  subject  the  innocent  and  unoffending  to  penalties, 
until  he  was  duly  informed  of  their  cxistcnct-*-orders  which  were  sup- 


w^ 


'\ 


k  ' 


'V;j,,/ 
Iitit 

H. 

J. 
at 

» 

r 


y3 


Erjmne,  of  March  25,  ISOS,  speaking  of  fhc  relaxations  of  Ibe  Hritish 
oiders,  iIiom>  relaxations  which  attorikd  lis  some  advanlagi-s  not  pcrn.it- 
tctl  by  llu-  Frcncli  tlecree>,  our  minister,  now  raised  to  a  ii:(tr  pitch,  ob- 
serves, "  I  forbear,  sir,  to  express  all  the  emotions  with  which  such  a 
'■  langiKigc  ix  calculated  to  inspire  a  nation,  which  cannot  for  a  nionunt 
"  be  llU(•(>^^^ir)us  otifs  rights,  nor  mistake  for  an  alleviation  of  its  wrongs, 
*'  regulations,  to  admit  the  validity  of  which  would  be  to  assume  badgts 
"  of  humilialion,  never  worn  by  an  independent  power." — 'I'his  is  truly 
the  language  of  wounded  pride  ;  and  of  a  cabinet  possessing  high  ideas 
of  national  honor.  If  the  occasion  required  it,  it  was  just — if  it  is  the 
same  course  which  they  have  adopted  towards  all  nations,  and  on  oc 
casions  still  moreaflrontive,  it  is  impartial.  We  shall  shew  that  it  merits 
neither  one  nor  the  other  praise  : — 

The  relaxatitjns  of  the  British  orders  did  not  merit  this  philippic. — An 
attempt  has  been  made  lo  consider  their  relaxations  as  insulting.  Let  us 
Lxaniinc  it. 

France  order";  the  blockade  of  all  British  ports — and  the  confiscation 
of  all  neutral  prupert\ ,  if  coming  from  such  ports,  or  the  growth  or 
maniifa(ture  of  h.-r  enemy. 

\i  Grcat-lh itahi  was  authorised  to  retaliate,  which  upon  this  part  of 
the  argument  we  must  take  for  granted,  she  had  a  right  to  retaliate  co- 
extensively  with  the  decrees  of  her  enemy  :  She  had  a  right  to  prohibit 
all  trade  with  France,  and  her  dependencies,  and  to  confiscate  all  pro. 
perty  the  produce  of  her  colonies.  Had  she  done  this  in  the  same  v:ord< 
which  BonApaute  had  u-id,  theonly  question  would  have  been,  whether 
the  lex  fa/ioius  was  applicable  to  the  case.  But  w  illing  to  lessen  the  hor- 
rible evils  of  sucli  a  wai  fare  upon  neutrals,  she  relaxed  its  rigour.  She 
authorised  the  whole  colonial  trade  with  her  enemy,  so  far  as  was  ne- 
cessary to  the  supply  of  neutrals  ;  and  she  even  permitted  the  trade  with 
the  continental  possessions  of  her  enemy,  upon  the  condition  that  the 
goods  \*ere  carried  to  her  ports,  and  there  subjected  to  a  duty.  A  per- 
fect option  still  remained  to  the  neutral,  whether  he  tcuulil  or  kohIU  mtt, 
avail  himself  of  this  indulgence  ;  but  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  how  this 
qualified  prohibition  was  cither  more  affroutive  or  more  injurious  than  a 
direct  prohibition,  like  that  of  France. 

That  this  was  a  mere  popular  trick,  invented  by  our  government  to 
excite  a  clamour  against  C/Vf/Z-BriVrt/w,  is  obvious  from  the  following 
facts  contained  in  the  dispatches  : — 

Mr.  Madison,  in  his  letter  of  March  25,  1808,  to  Mr.  Fkskine,  com- 
plained of  this  duty  as  adding  insult  to  injury,  more  especially  as  applied 
to  one  of  our  own  staples,  cotton. 

Mr.  Canning,  as  socui  as  he  was  acquainted  with  this  objection,  ap- 
plied repeatedly,  and  finally  addressed  a  formal  note  to  Mr.  Pinkney, 
assuring  him  that  in  makuigsuch  a  provision.  Great. Britain,  so  far  from 


// 


\ 


34 

wishing  so  givooltn.ro  <o(J,cUi,i(od  «:<'.<...     *i        w    , 

P';;A'.- it  ;«  al.soln.o  ,,roi.ibi»ion  "    ich   h    d'.-r    ""^^  'V^^'''^*    *''*'^  ^'^-'^ 

W'^^r  as  it  s,.,...|  „.  ,h.  .lonoos  ^lio^'^^r"  "  '^"  P'^^'-'bition  a*. 

i  had  iiuondal  frj  nodrp  -iMmT, 
noss  and  pa.-,iali,y  of  ..u';.  :;\::rj,'f "  '"■^^-ccs  of  .he  moan, 
anuletrnvd.  from  tho  exfonf  ^  M  J**"'*'^''  '^''^*'  f«o  nations  ;_but  J 
boon  obIi«..d  ,o  ^iveroHCl  7h:r^;;''T'"'"^'  «''-h  Ih!.^ 
ever,  briolly  notice  one  or  h.  o  LI  n't  Vv  !  '^  "'*'"!^''  ^  ^^all  how. 
g«ve  some  idea,  fhonph  a  faint  one  nf,h  .  ^'""P'*^^^'  "J^'ch  will  serve  to 
cabinet  to  the  liews  If  /C.l      '  ""^  '^'^"*'''^  P^'-^'^^'-'y  "four  present 

Mr.  Al.vnisoN's  letter  of  «h..  c»,i    r  if 
note  of  AlonsieurtHAMpl    ?;!:',;  ^;<'t    '««f'    "«<-^s   the   insolent 

retain  o„r  property,  arr..tedro;.nl\l\':;:f^^  of  /.„„,,  ,„, 

tide  whether  we  will  takean  actjv"  Tre  i'    ,1  '"'"""'  ""'*' ^ve  de. 

on  this  letter  of  Mr.  JMadison,  ''"  ''"'■•    '^  '^  ^o  be  observed 

rirstlij.     That  he  sends  in    W      a 
country,  to  shew  what  was  the  spIdM^.Thuli''  !'''  "^'^^P^pers   of  this 

or  :   On  which  it  must  occur  to  e'very  'fe^''?"  "^^'^^'^  ^y  ^^at  let- 

the  same  impressions  of  its  audacity  amS.  "''  g^^^'-nmcnt  had 

If  .s  extraordinary  that  nei^he    A  /  T    -      "  ;?• '  Z  ''   ""^   '''^'"v^''^. 
nor  the  democratic  members   ofCongns     2,h"  '^"  ""'"'^   '"^-^^^S^^ 

pf  ^..  a;Li^  Mr^  3/lo:lt'^™  1^;:^  t^r-'^ht  incen^:the  cabinet 

in  h.s  manner  he  does  not  oilend^i'is  Ma^stvTrr   '"  '^^^  '"''-^"^  ^''^^ 

The  last  case  which  I  shall  s.Irr/.     >  •    .-^  I'^niperor. 

seniency  of  our  Cabinet  to  that  ot  7W    iT'^/r"  ^i"'  "'''  "'^^"  ^"''- 
ie!.r.,,u  (o^u' burning  of  our  .bins  bvhr        .  /  ^'^"''^on's  letter  in 
the  IVct.Ind/c.         ^  ^^'P"  ^^  *^^  ^'  ••^■«ch  frigates  returning  from 


Ti 

havel 

\\ 

i<-  ml 
co«i 

a  t| 

all 
(I 


\, 


35 

attribute  all  the  e>f» 


>•' 


00 


No.  9. 


F.MaMINa  riov  f)f  tlic  famous  Uwcr  fP  Mr.  Mnilison  to  Mr.I'rskiiu',  ot  March 
25ili,  IHOH,  on  llio  siihjec.l  oi'  tlic  onU-rs  olflieat  lirit;iin  ;  wliirli  lias  bron  pro- 
Ijounci'il  hy  Ills  friends  to  lie  tlic  most  luininon^  ili^pla}  dfour  ii|;lits  aiui  iiijuiics. 

Morro. — "  TIi""  pi'ojios'.ilon  of  .NFr.  Ahuli'inn,  oi*  liis  pri'j.it  tor  ;■.  na' ';.',i(ion 
"act,  (of  wliicli  Mr.  .lufRrson  \v.\'<  i!iO  avillui.-)  s.ipnfd  tlic  llr'  i.^'i  ii\i;  i-fst." 

J-'iinr/it/\i  in'cr'fy  >•;,',/  ,'filrr,   (i.\    ',1,  !;''.M 

fOMMEXT.VUY. 

MR.  FAUCTirT  appcofs  to  li.ivc  known  most  (h',rijni^hhj  ilu-  rli.u.ic- 
tcr  ol"  our  jacobin  lenders: — Willi  Mr.  J(.Jtci;>oii  and  Mr.  M.uii.soii  lie 
declares  he  was  on  the  most  intiiiiatf  luoiiii;.^-;  he  speaks  of  them  vith 
the  alVeciioii  of  real  friendship.  The  authority  of  litis  letter  i;»  noi  dr  nicd — 
it  was  owned  l)y  I'aiichel,  and  confessed  l)y  U  indol])ii  himscif.  U  appears 
then  according  to  the  explanation  made  of  ii  by  his  Irietuls,  JetVer;-,on  and 
Madison,  at  the  tii'u-  Uiai  the  fainoit^.  i)toi>ohaI  of  comineicial  warl.irc 
■m<.de  by  Madison  in  17  J  I,  was  in  principle  the  saimc  as  the  oar  now  pro- 
posed, and  was  intended  xo  mji  the  /hi  L/i  inicvc^x. — In  oUkm-  words,  it. 
v*\.>.  iS  Mr.  Ames  then  declared,  u  measure  hostile  to  Great  liiitain,  an«l 
subservient  to  I'rance. 

It  is  impossible  to  ccnsutc  the  conduct  of  our  admi]\isiratioi\  toward*- 
Grc-it  Britain,  without  appearin;j,  in  .sow  de^-ree  to  defctul  tin  latter  wliile. 
you  critnitiate  the  former; — -uul  of  all  the  pernicious  errors  to  which  the 
times  in  which  we  have  unhapiHy  fallen  have  given  birth,  the  opinion 
recently  broached,  tliat  it  is  a  breacli  of  patriotism  to  pro\  c  our  own  !^r,v- 
ermnent  wront^  in  its  unjust  claims  apjainsl  a  foreis^n  nation,  is  the  myst 
dan^;crous.  If  this  absurd  opinion,  so  fatiil  to  freedom  and  public  peace, 
bad  been  confin»>d  to  the  tools  of  the  men  in  power,  its  cff"c(  ts  would  be 
unimportaiu  ;  but  some./('7('  A'.v.v  itiformccl  but  honcut  mm  of  opposite  opin- 
ions have  doubted  the  proi)ricty  of  putting  arguments  (as  they  are  pleased 
to  term  it)  in  the  mouths  of  our  enemy. 

If  this  doctrine  were  adhered  to,  the  ruin  of  the  nation  ctv.ild  nc\'er  he 
averted.  The  forms  and  checks  of  our  constitution  ;  the  rights  of  the 
press  and  of  private  opinion,  would  be  of  no  avail. 

If  a  case  could  be  supposed,  of  a  faction  arising  in  a  free  state,  who  at 
the  commencement  of  a  war  like  that  of  1793,  should  oppose  the  neutral- 
it  ij  declaied  by  its  government — should  enter  into  a  private  league  Avith 
the  public  agents  of  one  of  the  belligerents — should  encourage  illegal 
acts  of  hostility  aguiitst  the  other — should  so'icit  money  from  the  public 
ministers  of  one  belligeaent  to  stir  up  a  rebellion — should  in  fact  excite 
u  civil  war — should  justify  even  the  hostilitiss  of  their  favourite  nation, 
pnd  by  dint  of  slander  ixwi  corruption,  should  succeed  to  the  supreme 


I 


^ 


37 


I"  ffio- 

ji'iiits. 

f  '* 


I    lie 

V  iih 

C(|— 

Kurs 
'  iiad 
uc 
pio- 

S   if: 


power ;  would  it  no;  he  a  nio>l  extraordinary  exercise  of  r.inflo\ir  to  sup-  * 
|)')sc  that  surh  ci  set  of  men  slioiild  siulrlouly  iibaiidoii  all  llicir  pivjudicc^, 
and  behave  in  n  nniinei'  pcrlVciIy  impartial  towards  botli  the  luUii^en  tits.' 
Yet  this  monstrous  and  absurd  opinion  we  are  called  upon  to  adopt. 
AVI'.at  I  li.iVf  slated  as  hyj)othcsis  we  all  know  to  l)e /// /  >"7/.  If  men 
c.nnot  throw  ofl'  their  pas^i  )ns  and  deep  rooted  partialities  like  their 
coats,  then  we  are  fully  justiiied  in  doubtinij;  the  sinecrity  of  their  mcas- 
ues  wl'.en  they  i)rel(i)d  rcsentivicnt  against  their  politic  d  sup;»orters  and 
allies,  and  imp-.riiality  towards  those  wIkmu  they  have  unifoiinly  hati-cl. 

This  is  the  oidy  free  country  in  whicli  such  a  monstrous  doctrine  would 
b'^  listened  to  for  a  monu  nt,  ;tnd  the  very  men  who  maiul  tin  i'.  are  loud 
in  their  pr.ii<es  of  the  patriotism  of  Roscoe,  and  Harinij;,  and  Brouij;ham, 
and  the  Ediiihit'-g  Rcvi'ivrr.s,  who  even  in  the  midst  of  </  war  boldly  ar- 
r;ii:^n  the  policy  and  justice  of  their  (  wn  t!;overnment,  and  defend  tliat  of 
the  ualion.i  opposed  to  it.  Where  can  be  found  a  line  wiiieh  denies  the 
riiifht  of  these  authors,  or  which  attempts  to  silence  them  by  calumny  or 
thicats  ? 

!My  short  rcasonint^  on  this  topic,  independent  of  the  i^eiieral  rii^hts  of 
the  press,  is  this  : — 

Tlie  lirst  priiu  iple  of  a  free  gjovermnent  is,  that  the  hl'i.i.ks  i-rc  not 
inldlible  : — 'I'hey  have  passions,  and  they  may  err  like  other  men  ; — ihey 
are  also  as  corrii/iiibl< — lleucc  the  doctrines  of  fretjuent  elections. 

If  your  rulers  nu::/  err,  they  mav  eir  in  their  conduct  towards  f'ircii^-ii 
nations  ; — they  may  be  too  su|)[)li.int  to  one,  and  too  insolent  or  unjust 
to  another,  as  either  interest,  passion,  or  early  prejudices  may  dictate. 
To  admit,  therefore,  that  they  are  always  riijjht,  in  tlieir  (]uarrelsor  con- 
tests with  foreii^n  powers,  is  absurd,  atid  the  most  i  uinous  doctrine  which 
could  be  set  up  by  the  boldest  advocate  for  unlimited  despotism.  I  shall 
undertake  to  discuss  Mr.  Madison's  letter  to  Mr.  Erskine,  \vhich  the 
British  ciljinet  have  not  deemed  %\o;t!iy  of  reply,  and  shall  shew,  I  believe 
to  general  satisfaction,  (cxcludhii^  vioUini  partizans,)  tiu'.t  it  is  in  every 
material  part,  unfounded ;  and  as  tliis  letter  is  the  ^-reut  support  of  all  the 
present  measures — of  the  President's  message— and  oi  Mr,  Cumpbell's 
famous  report,  its  impodauce  deserves  and  demands  a  serious  investiga- 
tion. I  retard,  thai,  far  from  having  discussed  this  su!)ject  freely  in  the 
lower  house  of  Conj^ress,  there  appears  to  have  been  a  reluctance  to  enter 
itito  a  topic  so  oU'ensive  to  the  majority ;  and  from  this  cause  there  has 
appeared  a  disposition  to  make  coi\cc  ;sioi\s  which  hereafter  may  provi; 
detrin\ental  to  the  public  interest.  1  have  no  sui  h  flars,  and  the  ouly 
regret  I  feel  is,  the  conscious  inalillity  of  rcnderin;,;;  the  subject  as  inter- 
citing  A'6  I  cuu  certainly  make  it  clear  and  unansw.M'abie. 

Mr.  Madison's  letter  of  March  25,  1803,  to  Mr.  Erskiae,  is  confined 
to  the  topic  of  the  British  orders.  I'hese  famous  orders,  thouL^di  they 
formed  in  eflVct  no  part  of  the  considerations  which  induced  the  ruinous 
policy  under  wiiieh  we  arc  now  suileriajj — i.houii;h  tlv.;t  jvi'icy  was  fully 


Ml 


38 


resolved 


^^^";:r":„:r,^jST  ^'--" 


proved,  in  consc 


only  the  chi;.fnt^;;tKe7--  ar^uc  as  il^^d  S"!]""'^'  ^'^-^d- 
«d  i  1  tlie  o»i.nnn    r     '^"  ""^^''  "''"<•'>  I)roves  f '  .  /,     ^  V  '^^^^'^  '"^^"'^  .V^e 

ification  of  t'.o  o  o  l.       "''''"l'^'  "  '^^^-ne  nc^"ess^'Jr       "'^''''"""'^^'■^»- 
A.-e  the  BriU^h  S  "^rV'^^'^  JU^tificutir     "'  ^'^'^  ^"'^"•^^^'"^  ad- 

assent  to  tlK". ^'  ^'^'^-^  '-^-e  that  such^r/c't  wo^lTh'  '^  "''''  ^'- 
,   Our  situation,  both  with  f  •         n  •  '^'""'^^  ^"» 

^guinst....,,^jr^'"-on,uestof,^.,,i,;L^  " ':^:' '^'^^^ 


Bonaparte,  cJated  with  1^'  '"^"  "^'^"^  t'lc  2]st  of^;^, 
'^S^^n,inrufraItnXthu^^^^^^^  issue  1  hi.  " '   ^^"^^'^ 

It    I.IIVro   •      1 •. 


and  .v,'«.     It  is  „;;";,  •"^"  •»«  enemies,  or  in  thrin"^  'V  ""^«"'*  flecrce 
amble  deserves  tl  T^'T^  ^°  '"^^^^ Hiis  decree    . m"  '"'  '^"^'^  ^Y  '^"d 

*  ■'W'-  Ma.lison  shows  1,1,       •  ^        ^'Y  I'le  lute  committee  of 

Src;;.;:/^^:'-"'^'  to'^,K;^'-,;-^,stro„.,i^,„  .henhesavs   that 

o*  nations  is  a«-ai„st  U  em     'rf ""'  '^^^^'  "''  «-W>pose  tlu  r  5  "^^'  '^  ^''"'»^h  do 
^"'1  It  1.  even  uddul    hi    H.    1'"^  '"'"'^^'^  '""1  >een  c  ,„  n '  t     ,      ^'  "''^^  ''''^  ''^^^ 


. 


39 


'f'  li;ive 

'j'   t/)C 
f 'u;  ad- 

|lOl|  r/, 

■n  'he 
klopt- 


Congress ; — they  have    theielbre  volunteered  in  fincUntj  new  excuses, 
which  did  not  occur  to  tiie  prolific  mind  of  'i'allcyrund. 

Urco/uUtj.  'J'liat  Bonaparte  declares,  he  will  not  desist  from  this  system, 
until  Great  Britain  "  gives  up  all  maritime  captures  of  private  property — 
"  (until  the  lion  will  consent  to  draw  his  claws) — until  the  laws  of  war 
•'  u])on  )he  .vm,  shall,  like  those  upon  the  h/ucl.,  protect  private  property.'' 
— The   impudence  of  this  language,  from  a  man  then  loaded  with  the 
spoils  of  n.illions  of  now  houseless  and  innocent  individuah — a  man  who 
had  just  been  carving  up  the  patrimonies  of  twenty  German  noblenien, 
to  gi\e  titles  and  estates  lo  his  new -Hedged  Princes,  is  beyond  description  . 
■ — It  will,  ho^\e^er,  be  important  to  remember  this  part  of  the  preamble, 
when  we  come  to  remark  how  this  decree  wa;;  enforced  in  JKiitrd/iuKlfree 
States. — The   most  important  articles    of  the  decree,    were,    that  the 
"  British  lalutidn  were  in  a  sta';e  of  blockade." — As  they  were  Ulundxy  it  is 
not  easy  to  conceive  how  they  could  be  blockaded  but  by  -sea.,  nor  how  our 
government  could  believe,  that  they  were  not  intendi^d  to  operate  against 
the  only  neutral  ships  that  then  traversed  that  element. — This  simple  de- 
claration subjected  to  condenmation  all  property  found  going  in  or  coming 
out  of  British  ports ;  and  we  shall  soon  see  that  such  has  been  the  con- 
.struction  applied  to  it  by  Bonajxirte  aiul  his  tril)unals,  and  that  no  other 
construction  was  ever  given  to  it,  either  b)  liini,  or  any  legalized  ofhccr 
under  his  authority. 

The  other  article  of  thi  j  de>  rce,  interesting  in  the  present  uuiuiry,  is 
the  one  which  subjected  to  seizure  and  condeimiuiion  all  goods,  iv/icrc- 
soevcr  fomid^  of  English  growth  and  manufacture. 

That  this  decree  is  a  violation  of  the  Law  of  Nathans  will  not  be  denied, 
and  is  admitted  l)y  Mr.  Madison  himself. 

Nor  is  it  t]uestioned,  that  the  doctrine  set  up  by  Great  Britain,  as  to  the 
right  of  rctuuaii'jii.  i.i  v.cll  founded,  provided  the  facts  will  liear  them  out 
in  the  application  of  this  law. — Mr.  Madison,  indeed,  oblicjuely  admits 
this  principle,  in  his  letter  to  Mr.  Erskine,  of  March 'JO,  1807.  "The 
"  rcs/iecf,  (he  observes,)  which  the  United  States  owe  to  their  neutral. 
"'  rig/itfi,  will  a'ways  be  sufficient  pledges,  that  no  cul/uiblc  act/uiescence 
"  on  their  part  will  render  them  accrKnary  to  the  proceedings  of  one  belli- 
"  gerent  nation,  through  their  ri;;hts  of  neulraliiy,  against  the  commerce 
"  of  its  ad\ersary."  This  admits  that  an  ac.juiescence  by  a  neutral  na- 
tion, in  th';  edicts  of  one  party,  which  should  be  aimed  at  its  adversary, 
through  neutral  commerce,  may  be  culpable.,  and  render  them  acces- 
f.arien. 

The  elaborate  letter  of  Mr.  Madison,  which  we  are  now  about  to  ex- 
amine, admits  also  the  right  of  retutnitiun,  though  it  couples  it  with  a  con- 
dition or  quaiiiicalion  not  to  be  found  in  the  law  of  nations,  "  that  the  re- 
*'  taliation  must  be  measured  exactly  by  the  injury  :" — That  the  injured 
p.4rty  Uiust  keep  an  exact  accouui  and  return  precisely  as  many  and  as 
heavy  blows,  and  no  mwre,  tliau  he  has  received.     This  we  deny  to  bo  the 


•10 


) 


^l 


law  of  iKiUii'c  or  ol'  nations.  If  a  neutral  sufierb  \(>]\\n.ivn\yhhvruf)'al 
riii;ht!-  to  be  \ iolatcd,  to  llu-  injury  of  a  beil't/en.nt,  it  is  in  ilic  option  of 
that  belligerent  cither  to  consider  him  as  a  p-ny  to  the  war,  or  to  reV..li..te 
upon  his  enemy  tluou^h  the  «ri//r«/ to  the  i;tniosl  of  his  power. — U,  for 
example,  a  neutral  prince  sufTers  his  territory  to  be  violated  by  one  party, 
by  niarching  10,000  men  over  it  to  attack  his  enemy,  that  enemy  is  not 
bound  to  limit  his  retaliation  to  marchint,'  prtcLsc-'y  the  same  iiumbcr  across 
the  .latiir  territory. — Tliis  dcjctrine  woald  be  too  abs.in  d.  'I'liat  I  am  war- 
ranted in  saving-,  that  (Jrcat  H'.itain,  if  the  ^/f/^  sh;.ll  hereaiter  bet'r  her 
out  in  it,  would  Iravc  been  jusiiPed  in  conr-idciirig  the  ucfjuicsccnce  of  our 
government  in  the  lirr/in  tlecrccas  a  renunr  i^-tion  of  all  our  luun-alrii^lits., 
is  proved  from  the  following;  sliorc  citation  fiorn  tJ»c  vork  entitled, "  h^nti- 
"  tutioit  an  droit  MaraliDu  ^'^  bv  Monsieur  lM<ucLer,  Professor  of  Com- 
TTiercial  and  Maritime  Law  in  the  Academv  oi  Leyislatiun  at  Paris : — 

"Nations  mny  cease  to  be  nciitr.i)  in  two  particulars  : — Secoiidti'.  AViier,  tlu-y 
siifl'tr  tlic-ir  tint;- to  be  Acvrd  h\  iiy.t-  of"  trie  belLgtrents,  w'.eii  tliey  lui\elli<' 
jncans  of  niakinj;-  it  resjKctcd,  or  if  oik  iietifiiil  ii'at'i-.r  v.  In.  ii  earn  iiii^  to  anotlivr 
neutral  country  ai-tirlcs  wiiicli  it  is  iinlav.firi  ir>  cirrj'  to  a  bciliu-cixnt,  hiiilt'r.-> 
tluin  to  be  taken  from  lic-r  by  one  pint}",  v.itliout  demaiidirLT  reparation  ihv  ; lu- 
aftront,  slio  tacitly  reiioiinrrn  neulnJiiu,  b}  t^^ing^  a  paitsive  part  in  favor  of  ti:'*- 
nation  who  ii.is  done  tlie  injury." 

The  decree  of  Berlin  bcinj^  acknowledged  a  violaticn  of  public  la'.\.  "lul 
the  right  of  retaliation  havhig- been  proved,  fc.nci  uidet-d  admitted,  (.  us  ,  " 
how  Mr.  Madison  n-pels  the  right  to  apply  it  in  this  case,  or  ratii  1 1,1.^1  ■ 
cates  our  -idministratioit  from  the  charge  of  culpable  neglect  : — 

Firatlit.  lie  contends,  that  the  French   decre*'   vs.»  v>  explained  by  Monsieur 
Decres,  Minister  oCtlie  Miu-lnoj  tiiat   v.e  had  no  T\£Ut  to  jyfesume  that  it  wou'Id 
be  exerci.sed  nt^ainst  us. 

Sevondlii-  'J'hat  in  fact  it  was  never  enj'r.rrf.il,  isnt!!  October  16<h,  1807,  and 
therefore  tlierc  was  no  etilp;>ble  acpiiescence  on  the  part,  of  tiie  I  ni^ed  .States 

'riiiiiUii.  That  tl'.o  i)revi(,us  violations  cf  tho   'av.    of  nations  I     dreat  Britain 
rendered  her  tlie  ajj;'tiresHor,  piaced  France  in  the  positiuii  of  a  retaliating-  natmn 
and  took  aw  ay  the  rij^lit  ot  retal-  lion  to  which  Great  Britain  mig-lit  otherwise 
have  been  entitled. 

As  to  the  first  point,  the  explanation  of  Monsieur  Decres,  it  did  not 
change  the  situation  of  the  parties,  nor  diminish  our  obiigaiion  to  resist, 
for  the  following  reasons  : 

Firstly.  Because  that  answer  did  not  declare-  thit  tJ.e  ..ecrees  should 
not  derogate  from  our  neutral  and  conventional  rij^hts.  The  first  article 
was  explicit,  subjecting  every  vessel  that  went  in  or  came  out  of  British 
ports  to  sei7Aire  and  conde nutation.  Monsieur  Decies  does  not  say  that 
•jve  are  excepted,  but  simply  "that  that  decree  docs  not  change  the  pre- 
sent French  laws  as  to  maritime  capttu-ti."  In  this  he  was  right.  The 
laws  of  nations  and  of  France  pretiousiy  declared,  tliat  all  trade  with  ports 
blockaded,  is  forbidden  under  pain  of  forfeiture.  Bonaparte  onlv  applied 
that  law  to  the  British  islands,  which  he  could  not  blockade,  bu  .iatle  no 
change  in  the  general  principles  of  maritime  cai  itire. 


41 


Js  vrufral 
oi'tion  of 
'VT:.Ji,,te 
^— n;  for 
''(-•  pcuty, 
"y  is  not 
f-'i' across 
'till  war- 
be,.]-  Jicr 
ofonr 

Iit.sti. 
^  Com- 


"n  tlic-y 

Slu'Ifls 
of   til.? 


Sfcondlu.  Monsieur  Decvcs,  in  a  note  on  tlio  same  day,  addressccl  lo 
Gen.  Annstronij;.  vvirncd  him  that  lie  was  not  the  i-c^riular  oru;un  to  whom 
application  should  he  ni.idc,  and  that  "  he  had  much  Ass-  fiosi/ivf  iiifhrma- 
tion  than  the  Prince  of  Benevento,  as  to  he  nieanin}^  of  the  decrees." 
Z,r.9s  information  is  a  conipar^.tive  expression,  and  necessarily  ni<;ins 
somet'iini!:  short  of  ttcrfrct.  Mons.  Hecres  then  declared,  candidly,  to 
our  minister,  "  Sir,  I  have  no  authori' v  to  decide  : — My  '.fiiiuon  is  .luc/i^ 
but  my  infjrrnati'jn  of  the  Emperor's  iuten'.ions  is  imperfect." 

Thi'-dlu.  Our  ijovcmment  (c  nd  Mr.  Madison,  pi  rlicularly)  so  under- 
stood this  explanation  ;  for  they  wrote  to  General  Armstrong;,  in  May, 
1807,  that  they  were  anxious  to  have  the  I'niiicyor'.<  ',:r>i  r.i/'Jinia'ijn; 
a  measure  which  would  luive  been  uflVonlive  and  unprecedented,  if  Mon- 
sieur Dccres  had  been  authorised,  or  had  been  explicit ; — and  they  put  in 
thiit  letter  the  hypothesis.  "  Should  the  I'rcnch  t^ovcrumcnt  not  tivc  tiie 
"  fv  vor.bic  expUn.itions,"  you  will  Jo  fwhat  it  appears  was  never  done 
until  Xove-nber,  1807.)  r<'?Ho?z.si'ra/(»  aguinst  tlie  decree. 

F'iurthh.  Bonaparte  never  avowed  the  corrcctiu  ..s  of  the  explan.'ion 
of  Decres  ;  but  has  since  decidefl,  that  Ids  decree  was  cAcr  ./;»/ //^i^//;///- 
f^uouH^  and  was  to  be  enforced  accordini^  to  its  letter. 

rif'hlq.  An  explanation  of  a  d(;cree  or  order  diivctlycontriUT  to  und  in- 
consistent with  its  most  explicit  terms,  should  huve  l)eeri  reciived  wiili 
great  caution  ;  and  a  direct  and  explicit  answer  ought  to  have  been  in- 
sisted upon,  in  such  a  case,  without  the  unreasonable  delay  of  eleven 
■nK)nths. 

Hixthlu.  The  construction  put  upon  the  decree  by  French  officers, 
throutchout  the  world,  as  jjroved  by  Madison's  own  letter,  of  .May  2  2.  is 
a  proof  that  the  French  eovernment  never  intended  lo  except  us  tron»  its 
provisions  ;  and  it  was  incumbent  on  Mr.  Armstiong  to  have  seen  that 
directions  ronforniable  to  the  explanations  wete  transmitted  to  tiieir  olli- 
cers  ui  foreign  countries. 

Hnen'hi  .  The  government  wcri  guilty  of  gross  neglect  in  not  procur- 
ing these  explanations  to  be  confirmed.  I  find  Armstrong's  letter  cover- 
ing Decres's  note,  wus  comnuinicated  to  ('ongress,  February  19,  1807.— 
jMudis^in  avows  in  his  letter  of  M.iy  22,  18()7,  tiiat  they  were  not  contented 
with  Decree'  cxpLiiuitions. —  Why  then  wait  ninety  d  lys  before  they  in- 
structed their  minister  ;  and  how  hap[)ens  it  that  \\e  hear  of  no  demand, 
on  his  part,  uritil  tiie  fall  of  the  year,  1807  ?  Great  Brit..in  waited  for  these 
explanations,  but  she  Wi.ite<'  '  ^  vain. 

If  the  note  and  explanations  of  Monsieur  Dec:  will  not  justify  the 
aubnussion  of  our  govcriuiient  to  the  Jieiiiii  decree,  much  less  will  the 
aec'jud  pretence,  that  it  was  /irx'  r  riij'orci'd, 

Fir-sHiu  Beccusc  from  the  moment  it  was  issued  it  was  enforced  hi  tho 
EuroiJCaU  and  Western  seas,  as  far  as  the  state  of  the  French  marine 
■Would  admit.  That  captures  did  take  pK^ce  in  pursuance  of  its  li'eral  and 
pxtendcd  mcaniriy;,  cannut  bt;  denied  ;  and  we  liold  it  incumbent  f.n  our 

6 


^^. 


42 


.j|  -' 


governmcTit,  it"  it  would  avail  itself  of  defence  on  this  point,  to  prove  that 
the    vessels  so  taken  were  liberated  by  the  hij^hest  judicial  aulhoriiy  of 

France Instead  of  which,  the   ground  taken  is,  that  no  decisions,  no 

o\'ert  acts  of  inferior  officei's,  or  tribunals,  are  chargeable  to  the  I'rench 
n:.tion,  until  confirmed  by  the  highest  authority  ;  and  in  pursuance  of  this 
idea,  Mr.  Madison,  with  more  boldness  than  truth,  asserts,  that  the  first 
case  which  occurred  was  tha.  of  the  Horizon,  an  unfortunately  stranded 
ship,  and  which  was  not  condemned  by  the  highest  tiibunals  until  Octo- 
ber 1 6,  1 807. — This  is  mere  sophistry,  directly  opposed  to  the  conduct 
of  all  nations,  and  of  our  own  under  meru  adniim.sira/ion,  especially  the 
PRI'LSENT.  Did  we  not  contend  that  we  had  a  right  to  complain  of  the 
courts  of  V.  Admiralty  in  Martinique,  in  1 79:1  ?  Did  we  not  found  some 
of  our  heaviest  complaints  against  Great  Britain  upon  the  conduct  of  Gen- 
era i  Grey  and  Admiral  Sir  John  Jervis,  though  unauthorised  by  their  o^vn 
government  ? — And,  in  later  times,  have  we  not  seen  an  act  of  exeni- 
pl.iry  self-redress,  an  act  of  serious  and  alarming  import,  the  prohibition 
of  the  entry  of  British  public  ships,  not  mcrctu  laid  as  a  precautionary 
measure,  on  account  of  the  act  of  an  inferior  ofllicer,  but  adhered  to,  most 
pcrthiaciously  adhered  to,  though  it  was  perceived  that  it  was  an  eternal 
bar  to  ami    Ve  adjustment. 

Yet,  my    '  citizens,   this  same   inconsistent  administration   has 

the  audacity  iv,  are  to  the  world,  that  France  never  in  one  umtancc 
enforced  her  ii<  In  decree  before  the  case  of  the  Horizon,  on  the  meta- 
physical distinction,  that  that  was  the  first  instance  in  which  her  /lig/usC 
authority  sanctioned  it.  thougii  Mr.  Madison  declares  in  a  former  letter, 
that  the  I'rench  IVest- Itidia  crulzcrs,  were  "indulging  their  licentious 
"  cupidity,  and  were  enforcing  the  Berlin  decree  in  a  manner  that  w  ould 
constitute  just  claims  of  redress." 

Secondly.  Mr.  Madison  asserts,  positively,  that  the  case  of  the  Horizon 
WIS  the  first  that  occured  of  the  positive  extensi'^n  of  the  Berlin  decree 
to  our  trade  ;  and  that  as  that  took  place  only  on  the  16th  of  October,  1807, 
it  could  not  have  been  known  in  England  on  the  1 1th  of  November,  the  date 
of  their  orders  ;  but  it  appears  that  the  Emperor,  on  the  23d  Sept.  1807, 
in  answer  to  certain  queries  addressed  to  him  from  Bordeaux,  replied, 
that  -iS  the  decree  of  November  21,  contamed  no  exceptions,  there  should 
be  none  in  the  application.  Monsier  Cretet,  minister  of  the  interior, 
uiuler  the  date  of  September  18,  1807,  refers  to  the  resolution  of  the 
Emperor  to  enforce  the  decree  of  Jierlin  according  to  its  letter.  It  will 
not  be  pretended,  that  when  the  mail  reaches  the  Br;  cabinet  often  in 
four  days,  they  had  not  notice  of  this  resolution  in  two  months  after. 

Thirdlij.  But  the  last,  and  conclusive  answer  to  this  excuse  for  the 
lethargy  and  submissive  meanness  of  our  administration,  is,  that  the  Ber- 
li'.  decree  was  executed  first  in  Hamburg,  and  afterwards  in  Tuscany, 
iwo  'ii'ufrul  and  indcfu-ndnit  States,  against  American  property.  This  is 
•admitted  in  Mr.  Madison's  Icttw  of  February  8,  1808,iu  which  he  at  that 


^ 


„ 


reru  Into  day  tells  ouf  Tninister,  at  Paris,  to  inquire  into  the  cases,  and 
make  such  a  kin.l  of  i-eprcsciUation  as  the  c.ises  mi.i^ht  require.  The 
enforceinciit  of  the  Berlin  decree  was  by  French  arms,  not  by  the  consent 
of  the  local  so\ercit^ns.  Bouricnne,  French  minister  at  Hamburg,  in  one 
case  ordered  the  seizure,  and  Miollis,  a  French  general  at  Leghorn,  in 
th(.'  other.  In  the  Uiltci'  case  it  will  be  recollected  that  Tuscany  was  not 
a  conquered  country,  but  by  solemn  treaties  recognized  as  independent. 
The  forced  and  fraudulent  treaty  of  Fontainbleau  had  not  surrendered  that 
kingdom  at  the  date  of  the  decrees  and  seizures  of  which  I  speak  ;  and 
it  is  well  known  that  the  government  of  Etruria,  so  far  from  lending  its 
aid  to  these  perfidious  .icts,  remonstrated  against  their  operation,  but  in 
vain.  Shall  we  l)e  told  that  this  i)ro])erty,  after  much  vexation,  was  re- 
stored, on  condition  of  paying  a  tril)ute  to  the  l*'reebooter  ? — This  alters 
not  the  principle. —  The  decree  was  enforced  in  neutral  territory,  always 
deemed  more  Siicred  than  neutral  hips,  and  the  tendency  of  it  was  to 
check,  nay,  destroy  all  neutral  commerce  in  the  goods  of  the  growth  or 
manufacture  of  Great  Britain. 

This  enforcement  then  alone  was  a  full  justification  of  the  British  de- 
cree ;  and  our  government,  in  place  of  remonstance,  against  this  enforce- 
ment have  opcidy  justified  i*^  by  their  dijilomatic  apologies. 

The  last  defence  of  Mi-.  M  alison,  of  the  shameful  supineness  of  the  ad- 
ministration, is  predicated  on  the  assertion,  rather  becoming  a  French 
pensionary  than  a  minister  of  a  sovert  ii;i\  State,  that  France  was  author- 
ized to  consider  the  previous  interpolation  upon  national  law,  niade  by 
Great  Britain,  as  justifiable  causes  of  retaliation. 

These  are  confined  to  the  cases  of  blockade,  and  to  the  question  of  the 
colonial  trade.  As  to  the  former,  if  the  commanders  of  small  squadrons 
have  occasionally  overleaped  the  strict  rules  of  the  law  of  nations,  their 
Admiralty  Courts  have  been  always  prompt  to  give  redress  ;  and  I  de- 
fy the  honourable  Secretary  to  point  a  case  on  the  subject  of  blockade,  de- 
cided by  the  highest  Courts  in  England,  where  the  doctrine  extends  be- 
yond the  principles  of  the  armed  neutrality  on  this  point. 

As  to  the  question  of  the  colonial  trade,  I  had  prepared  myself  to  enter 
largely  into  it  ;  and  shall  probably  do  it  on  some  future  occasion —  but  I 
shall  limit  myself  at  present  to  the  few  following  remarks  :— 

The  conduct  of  Great  Britain,  on  this  point,  is  stated  by  Mr.  Madison 
as  entirely  modern. — We  says  that"  it  was  never  asserted  till  the  wai  of 
1736  ;  and  that  Great  Britam  is  the  only  nation  which  ever  acted  upon  it 
Of  i^ave  it  otherwise   i  sanctioq." 

This  rash  and  unfounded  assertion  has  been  most  fully  refuted  in  the 
late  argumentative  speech  of  Col.  Pickering  ;  and  he  has  shewn  that  half 
a  century  before  it  was  advanced  in  British  Courts,  it  was  solenmly  de- 
creed by  the  French  King.  Whether  our  minister  of  State  was  igt\or,  rit 
of  the  ("rench  ordinances,  or  pm'posely  suppiesaed  them,  he  has  the  Irce 
option  to  decide— liut  perhaps  he  will  say,  vUat  iike  llic  decree  of  Jiaiiny 


-.■< 


.!■  ' 


:y 


fjp' 


f/ 


!»-,  ^.ujna*"**" 


> 


44 


'^ 

'/ 


li 


wlucli  he  so  nbly  clcFcnils,  they  were  never  enforced — tliey  were  "TO.r  n 
a /ii-ffcrea  /li/iii'" — Hcio  I  an  luippy  to  lie  ubie  to  sui)]M)rt  the  artrun.ent 
of  the  venerable  and  inllexil)le  patriot,  Colonel  Pickerinp;,  by  shewhii^, 
from  aviiliority  wlnrli  wid  not  be  disputed,  that  ihe  French  decrees  of 
1704  and  1744,  cuttini>;  off  the  colonial  trade  were  actually  enforced. 

In  the  treatise  entitled  '■'■La  Xovi-au  CodcN  dc  P:i.vii"  written  imder 
the  orders  and  auspices  of  the  I'rcnch  p:overnnient<  by  one  of  their  own 
ofliccrs,  in  a  note  under  the  ordonnance  of  1704,  it  is  said,  "  This  was 
"  cc,ii.<iu>itlij  foltonvid  durint!,  the  war  of  1756,  and  until  the  war  of  1778." 
The  decrees  of  1704  and  1744  made  all  i!,oodsof  the  tjrowth  or  produce 
of  the  enemy,  found  in  any  daee  txciit  li.vccn  tie  leiuiil  cf.ii;try 
unci  the  country  which  jModuced  them,  lawlul  prize;  and  this  writer  de- 
riuies  they  were  uniformly  enforced  until  the  war  of  1778 — Then  indeed 
the  pcilicy  was  iijm/ihi//t/  chant>;ed. — The  le>iii;ue,  of  which  I'rance  per- 
su  '.ded  the  LLmi)ress  of  Russia  to  be  the  head,  attempted  to  force  upon 
Great  liilt.in  a  n.'w  maritime  code  intVin;;inL^  the  old  law  of  nations. — 
The  coalition  ett'ectcd  nolhinij; ;  and  not  one  of  the  then  contracting;  par- 
lies has  adhered  lo  the  same  i)rincipics. 

Hussi.>  iierself,  the  iiead  of  that  famous  coalition,  has  in  subscfpicnt 
conventions,  .ibiuuloned  all  its  piinciples,  .nd  particularly  in  a  pretty  re- 
cent treaty  with  England  has  acceded,  in  fi'j.sitive  terms,  to  the  correct- 
ness of  the  rule  of  l.ouis  XIV.  of  1704,  so  far  as  to  embrace  ixplidthj  the 
rule  of  17j6. 

Thus  we  see,  that  neither  of  the  defences  set  up  by  our  administration, 
vi'l  cover  the  deformity  of  their  i)eha\iour  towards  the  two  belligerents  : — 
That  they  have  accepted  a  futile  and  ridiculous  explanation  in  the  sincer- 
ity of  which  they  did  not  believe  : — That  they  are  mistaken  in  pretending 
the  Irench  decree  was  not  enforced,  and  equally  so,  in  selling  up  lor 
France,  an  excuse  thai  her  decree  was  only  retaliulory. 


Kote  1. 


Ufiop  the  violations  of  Keutral  territory  by  France. 

We  li.ivc  s:iid  in  the  text,  that  the  Rcrlin  decree  was  instantly  enforced  in  the 
neutral  and  independent  state  of  Hamburg-,  and  afterwards  in  that  of  Tuscany, 
but  as  this  i)oint  is  the  most  important  we  have  urged,  and  entirely  destroys  the 
feeble  fabric  raiseil  by  oiu"  apologizing  secretary,  we  shall  insert  the  following 
proofs  in  su])port  of  our  assertion  : — 

Firstit/.  "  On  the  24th  day  of  November,  1806,  three  days  only  after  the  date 
"of  tlie  Berlin  decree,  Bourienne,  minister  ot  France  at  llamburg,  notified  the 
"  Senate  of  that  free  city,  the  only  legitimate  authority,  '  that  all  Englisli  nii  r- 
"  chandi/.e  in  the  harbour  or  territory,  iw  mnitcr  to  ivhom  helongiiiq-,  sliotild  be 
'•  coniiscatcd.'  Similar  notices  were  issued  to  the  free  cities  of  Lubeck  and 
"  ^^rcmen." 


t 


,, 


% 


45 


lo.r  rt 
Miv.ent 

I'ecs  of 
i. 

juiuler 
If  own 
lis  was 
778." 
kIiicc 
|i  inry 


>?  t 


.Thetsp  farts  were  known  in  the  Unit'.<l  States  to  o»ir  trovernmept  in  February. 


.18')7. 


lUil  w  t  ro  nol  nir.icfil  l>\  tlii'ni  till   l\'bri 


Biiii^h  rctali;it<ir\  ui-ilcis,  and  twche  months  alic 


lH>)f!.   ill 
r  ilic  injiines. 


nioniiis   ;;fi'f  tlie 


Secundhj.  Ca|)iain   Milli.iril  arrivt'd  at  New-London  from   Lisbon,  in   r-'chniary, 


J8!J7,  and  static!  tiiat  the  t-flcrt  of  the  Hcilin  (U-crcc  was  so  ^reat   in  iliat  r 


ity 


tliat  man\  )ie'^/('f// slii])s  hidcn  in  that  /((//^ivi/ country  for  Enj^hnid  liad  Ijolii  oMi^-- 
rd  to  nnladc  tluir  cari^ots — Sucli  were  the  ap])reheiisions  of  its  cH'eets  ninety 
da\  s  after  ilsdate,  and  so  sfiioim  \V(  i\-  its  exils  lo  diiat  IJrilain. 

TiiirtUu.   His   .Majestv    Louis   Kins;- of  Holland  in   a  sineeli  lo  his  lepshitnrr  of 
the   5tli    IJeei mher,    18ij6,  uidy   (ifteen   d;.ys  after   the  date  of  the  ILmperor   his 


broth 


er  s  <leerei', 


spe 


ik 


of  it. 


"  That   the  sii/K'n-fsiion  of  iM'rv  neutral 


\ftusr,  and  i)ai'ticnlarly  the  tfintrnd  l)h)rkade  (this  was  before  the  Riitish  block- 

'  ade  of  Kiiro|)ean  jjorts)   lia\e  annihilated  the  last  resources  of  ronunerre,  but 

that  these  temporary  evils  nuist  be  endured,  as  they  are  intended  to  produce 


"  eventual 


g-c 


'I'lius  then  while  Madison  and  Jefferson  are  upoloR-izinjj  for  the  rJerlin  decree. 


the   Kintj  of  111: 


d,    till-    brother   of  the  t\rant,  and   his  tool,  declares  that   it 


IS  uioi,  (leeu'res 

amounts  to  the  total  *^  siiJifircKxioii  i/f  evryii  neutral  fii.^,  i\.ud  thi:  ctnii/ii/iitioii  of 
"  cominerre."  Since  our  jf'overnnient  have  extended  this  decree  to  us  by  the 
emba-iTd  we  perceivi'  that  this  descri[)tion  is  but  loo  we'l  founded. 

Fonrthlij.  Honajjarte,  under  the  Herlin  decree,  on  the  I'Jth  Au.fnst  mnrched 
30(J0  men,  undt-r  ficm-ral  M'.oUis  into  Li-.chorn,  seized  all  the  .  hiirriciiii  <iiul  nl!ii;r 
«(';(/»•(// property  w  liicli  had  bei'n  of  nritisii  urowili.  'Hk-  journal  of  tlie  litUe 
cit\  of  Auicsiiiir.i^',  iti  (Wi-many,  oaued  to  eharacteri/.e  thi-.  sei.'.iire  us  an  uv.  of 
violence  "  coniniitted  in  ilie  i  n-dei'en  uen' r  stale  of  Tuscany,"  thus  confirmint^ 
our  remarks  in  the  text. 

Mr.  L>rael  Williams  of  Salem,  who  left  Leiihorn  October  1st,  ICu",  confirms 
our  declaration,  that  the  Q  een  of  K.truria  was  opjjosed  to  ihis  seiztire,  and  of 
course  that  it  was  a  forciliie  breach  of  the  neutr.ility  of  .".n  iii<U|.endent  so^c- 
rei.arn. 

'I'hese  sei/.ures  were  known  and  noticed  in  the  Englisli  journals  sixty  days 
before  the  date  of  their  ri'taliating-  orders. 

Fiftlih/.  The  tyrant  of  Kuro|ie  inforced  his  decrees  in  the  Pajuil  tfvritorii, 
atiotlier  neutral  sovereig'n,  on  the  lyUi  Si  ptiinber.  This  fact  v.  as  also  known 
and  stated  in  the  Hritish  jjapers  jn-ior  to  their  orders  of  Xovember  11th. — Hut 

Si.rt/ili/.  The  most  iin])ortant  fact  shew  int.;'  the  conlidenee  which  the  Hritish 
g'overntnent  re|)osed,  but  erroneously  rr/josi'il  in  tin'  /innoitr  of  our  cal)inci,  is 
tierived  from  a  sjnech  of  the  Advocate  (.eniral  in  I'arlianient.  on  the  4lli  Feb- 
ruar\ ,  1807,  more  than  nine  montlis  ])rior  to  their  ordi'rs.  He  says,  "That  on 
'•  the  19th  ,lanuar\,  1798,  a  tU  cree  \\  as  passed  by  I' ranee  makini;-  all  vessels 
"  freig-hted  in  whole  or  in  part  v.  ith  I'ritisli  eoinmodities  lawful  prize.  To  shew, 
says  he  "  what  vv-as  the  inili;j^nation  of  neutral  nations  at  this  decree,  the  Presi- 
"dent  of  the  L'nited  States,  thu  Hon.  John  .hliiin::,  stated  to  Cong-ress,  'that  as 
"  that  Frencli  decree  had  not  been  re|)ealed,  notwithstandin:';  our  attempts  to 
"pet  it  repealed,  he  considered  it  as  an  uinqiiivncal  act  nfwtir,  and  to  be  rcaistrd 
"  as  such,'  "  and  the  Loril  .Vdvocate  adiled,  "  there  could  be  no  doubt  but  .Vmeri- 
"  ca  coidd  .ict  with  ecjual  spirit  on  the  pi'esent  occasion." — Mas  I  I  he  little  under- 
f^tood  the  cliuractcr  of  our  present  rulers,  or  our  miserubk  deterioration. 


45 


Xofe  2. 


French  Regard  for  JVeutralai  !  .' 

In  order  to  jiistify  the  oiitrap^cniis  conduct  of  France  in  issninpthe  Berlin  de- 
cree, Mr.  M.idis.iin,  ;iiul  mluM-  piil)l'u-  men,  liave  pretended  thai  (ireat  Britain  was 
the  Hjir.ifresb(ir,  and  ha\e  <  vc n  i;:()nc  back  to  the  war  of  1756,  to  prove  it.  Al- 
thuii','-h  we  protest  against  litis  extraordinary  course  of  going  beyond  treaties  of 
peace  and  commerce,  to  tinil  apolof^ies  for  recent  vexations,  yet  we  believe  that 
Great  Britain  would  ijain  by  the  comparison,  and  tliat  France  would  appear  to 
have  been  always  the  tirst  to  violate  netitral  rights.  To  prove  this,  wc  make  the 
following'  abstract  from  the 

Code  des  Prizes  fiar  I.e/ieiiu  rhnnrS  des  details  dii  Bureau  des  Tjoin  du  JMinintre  de 
la  Marine  et  des  Colonies.    Printed  at    he  Public  Aational  Prest. 
154.3.   Art.  42.  F.dict  (hclaring  eivmies'  goods  in  the  .ship.s  of  a  frit-nd,  or  even 
ally,  lawful  pri/.e,  and  the  goods  of  a  friend  in  the  ships  of  er^mies  equally  so, 
and  confiscating  the  shij)  in  the  former  case. 

15S4.  Article  65,  reciting  the  imjiossibility  of  discerning  a  friend  from  an  enemy 
by  si.j;lit  only,  authorizes  the  pursuit,  capture,  and  search  of  neutrals  or  allies, 
andiiic««e  of  resistance  by  such  neutral,  ordt;rs  for  that  catise,  condi^mnation. 

Article  69,  confirms  the  article  of  tlie  ordonnancesof  1543,  as  to  condemnation 
of  enemies'  goods  in  neutral  bottoms,  and  neutral  goods  in  enemies'  vessels,  and 
declares  that  neutral  persons  on  board  enemies'  ships  shall  be  lawful  prisoners, 
as  well  as  enemy  persons  generally  in  neutral  vessels. 

1073.  Dec.  19.  Ordonn.iiu-e  confirms  the  principle  that  enemies'  goods  shall  be 
good  prize  in  neutral  vessels,  except  where  treaties  with  neutrals  forbid. 

AiigtiSL  5,  1676.  Decree  declaring  that  as  his  Majesty  had  issued  a  proclama- 
tion, ordering  :dl  Frenchmen  in  the  service  of  ani/  foreiq-n  state  to  return  under 
pain  of  death — rtrders  the  punishment  to  be  commuted  for  the  gallies. — August, 
1681,  dec!cc,  Art  7th,  confirms  the  law  that  enemies'  goods  in  friendly  ships 
shall  be  good  prize,  and  also  confiscates  the  ship— and  friends'  powls  in  an  en- 
emy ship,  equally  fo. — confirmed  by  decree  of  Council  25th  Oct.  1692,  in  a  par- 
ticular case  ;  the  satne  principles  are  confirmed  by  Art.  5th,  of  the  Ordonnance 
of  23d  July,  17u4,  and  further  confirmed  by  Art.  5tli  of  the  Ordonnance  of  Oc- 
tnl)er  21st,  1744,  except  so  fa*  as  relates  to  the  neutral  ship  itself,  inis  last 
Oidoimance  contlnueil  to  be  enforced  till  1778.  So  late  also  as  the  29th  June, 
177y,  the  coinicil  of  jjrizes  condemned  the  property  of  certain  «e«/m/ merchants 
of  Tuscany,  under  the  above  Ordonnance,  for  having  been  found  on  board  an 
English  ship,  the  fJrand  l)i/rhess  of  Tuscany. 

By  a  decree  of  Deciinber  6tli,  1779,  of  the  council  of  prizes,  present  the  King, 
a  D.'<.nish  ship,  the  ,'hwu,  was  condemned,  together  with  all  her  cargo,  because 
gome  part  of  that  ergo  belonged  to  British  subjects. 

Aniele  1 2'h,  of  the  Ordonnance  of  1681,  authorizes  force  against  anv  vessel 
which  refusei  search,  and  condemns  for  resistance  only. 

Decree,  1692,  Oct.  26,  of  the  King  in  Council,  declaring  that  the  vessel  and 
cargo  St.  John,  being  a  neutral  ship,  should  be  condemned,  because  a  »/na//part 
t)f  her  cargo  belonged  to  an  enemy. 

Feb.  17,  1694 — Oi-ders  the  condemnation  of  all  ?;p(//rn/ vessels,  if  originally  of 
enemy's  fabric,  or  once  owned  by  an  enemy,  unless  the  bill  of  sale  and  powere  of 
attornev  are  found  or,  board, 


U 


47 


? 


^- 


Ordonnance  of  25th  July,  1704,  recites  in  the  preamble  his  Arajostv's  flisposi- 
tiou  rather  to  tnlurpe  than  abridj^c  the  riplitsof  nculrals,  (IccImis  (as  Hoii.ipai-tc 
docs  in  all  his  pnnnibles)  that  his  Majcsts  i«  in  favour  of /jec  conpniirco,  and 
especially  '* to  •)rfser\e  the  sume  extent  and  t lie  same  lihirty  of  commerce  to 
♦•  neiitruh,  which  they  had  been  accnstonicd  to  enjoti  (hiring  tiie  peace."  He  pois 
on  m  the  usual  French  cant  to  charg'e  his  <-neniies  tlie  Enpj^lish  ami  Dutch,  \y\\h 
causing"  still  j!;Teater  restraints  »!])(m  the  comiTicrce  of  iieutnds,  an«l  says  tl>at 
"  he  could  with  /M.v/»ce'  liave  followed  their  example,"  thus  setting  up  in  the 
broadest  terms  the  law  of  retaliation  throui;h  iwvtriiln. 

Tiie  five  first  articles  of  this  Ordonnance  contain  the  limitation  of  ihc  Neutral 
trade  as  follows ; 

1st.  Neutrals  may  carrj- their  ow/»  ?iaf/ve /»ro(/«cf,  except  contraband,  even  to 
an  enemy. 

2d.  Neutrals  may  carry  even  from  any  enemy's  country  lUrect  to  thfir  o-iii,  any 
goods  of  which  they  shall  be  the  owners. 

31.  Neutrals  are  forbid«kn  to  carry  from  one  neutral  country,  pootls  of  the  fa- 
brick  or  prowtli  of  an  enemy  of  his  majesty,  t-veii  tu  another  ucutrul  country,  on 
pain  of  confiscation  of  the  pjotls. 

4th.  Neutrals  arc  forbidden  to  transport  any  _c^oods  of  tiie  j^rowth  or  fabrick 
of  an  enemy,  fiom  the  port  of  any  neutral  to  any  enemy's  port,  on  pain  of  Ibr- 
fcitinjj  the  ivhnle  carg'o,  f)f  which  ami  part  is  of  enemy's  g'ronth. 

5th.  All  neutral  vessels  having  on  board  g-oods,  tlie  property  of  an  enemy, 
shall,  together  with  their  cargoes,  be  lavKful  prize. 

By  another  Ordonnance  of  October  21,  1744,  all  the  fiiregoing  articles  were 
confirnted,  except  the  last,  which  sidjjected  the  ship  of  a  n',iilr:«l  as  well  as  the 
cargo  to  forfeiture,  which  was  relaxed  so  far  only  as  respects  the  ship. 

Monsieur  Le  Beau,  in  this  na'ional  work,  printed  in  1800,  says,  that  "tbe#« 
decrees  were  constantly  pursued  during  t/te  -.uar  rtf  1756,  but  that  in  tlie  war  of 
1778,  there  were  some  changes."  See  Le  nouvcau  codes  des  prises,  page  284,  in 
a  note  of  the  Editor. 

The  cause  of  the  changes  made  in  ^778,  is  well  known  to  those  wlio  have  at- 
tended to  the  intrigues  and  objects  of  tl."  armed  neutrality. 

There  are  three  other  extraordinary  articles  in  the  Orflonnance  of  1744,  re- 
pugnant to  the  law  of  nations,  and  all  of  which  Monsie  ur  Le  Beau  observes,  were 
re-enacted  in  the  Ordonnance  of  1778,  and  were  acted  upon. 

1st.  Condemns  neutral  vessels  ai\d  cargoes  solely  for  the  cause  of  havin,^ 
thrown  overboard  any  papers,  tliough  enough  remain  on  board  to  prove  the  neu- 
trality of  the  property. 

2d.  Condemns  netitral  vessels  if  they  shall  have  contravened  the  passports  of 
their  own  sovereign. 

3d.  Condemns  all  itcutral  vessels  which  shall  have  undertaken  any7i*'TO  vovage 
other  than  the  one  stated  in  her  clearance  ;  and  declares  that  no  passj)orts  shall 
ke  valid  imless  the  ship  was  at  the  moment  of  issuing  in  her  own  country. 

11th  Article  of  the  same  Ordonnance,  declares  null  all  pass[)orts  granted  to 
»wners  or  musters  of  neutral  vessels,  if  such  owner's  or  masu  rs  were  subjects  of 
an  enemy,  imless  such  persons  had  been  tuituralized  before  the  war. 

Tlie  public  will  perceive  in  tlie  foregoing  article,  the  inju.slice  of  tiie  clamours 
which  have  been  urged  against  Great  Britain,  on  the  subjecL  of  her  refusing  to 
respect  our  Naturali/.ation  law,  as  to  her  own  subjects.  These  Euii-lishmen,  so 
naturalized,  are  by  the  pr-seni  law*  of  Frunce,  liable  to  be  seized  -.i^  prisoners  of 
■war,  and  the  ships  they  own  or  Gummaiie',  are  pvize,  and  yjt  au  Finghsh  sove- 
reign cannot  touch  them 


k   ^„ 


48 


h 


/ 


In  tlic  Orclonnancc  apainst  marine  di-scrtcrs,  passed  hy  the  Frenrh  Kinp  in  Oct. 
oliLT,  17H4,  it  is  (l(  fl.iiid,  lliat  a//  rrriich  clii.isrtl  i^nimen,  wlictlu  r  ilrsrvfi'in  or 
not,  who  fvfii  in  liim-  of /)fr/rc  shall  he  found  on  hnard  forficru  ships  without 
leave,  shall  he  im|)risoned  (ifleen  days,  ^c^ — and  if  arrested  m  tinu;  of  tvur  on 
board  FoitKic.v  ships  .shall  he  sent  to  the  (.Cidlevs. 

Thai  sueh  is  the  inie  construction  of  this  article,  will  be  evident  to  every  per- 
son accpiaitited  with  the  French  lang'tiap^-e  and  marine  laws,  and  that  "  seront 
wrf/^.?  cur  des  na\  ires  etranj,''ers,  ou  passant  en  pays  <-tranfT'er,"  are  very  different 
terms  from  "  f/rins\w  des  \  aisseati\  enneinls,"  and  tliat  the  former  means  simply, 
arrestatlim  in  neutrnl  wrrcluiat  ii/ii/).i. — If  any  independent  Neutral  nation  had 
spoken  wholly  the  I'rencii  langMia[je,  wc  should  have  seen  this  decree  rig'idlv  and 
fie()'ienll     eni'irei  d. 

lien-  then  is  cU  dared  what  wc  have  lontj  soiig'ht  to  establish  as  the  French  law, 
the  ri_u;ht  to  seize  in  lime  of  war,  their  own  seaman  not  deserters,  not  in  enemy^s 
ships    but  an\'  fovciirn  fi/iifis-. 

Ordonnance,  May  9lli,  1793,  orders  all  vessels  helon'^inti;'  to  neutrals,  which 
shall  bi'  ladin  in  whole  or  in /'^/r^  uith  provisions  boiuul  to  an  enemy,  or  with 
enemies'  |)ro))erty,  to  be  detained  and  Ijrouj^ht  in  ;  tlie  merchandize  of  enemies 
forfeited,  and  the  other  paid  for  at  fair  \alne. 

It  will  ])e  rememliered  that  this  was  the  very  first  order  of  either  bellipi'erent 
ai^-uinst  neutral  trade  in  the  late  war,  beini;-  dated  thirty  da\  s  before  the  ijritish 
provision  order  of  .liine  8th,  1793 — it  was  also  a  violation  of  the  treaty  of  1778. 
On  the  2.Sili  May.  1793,  they  declared  that  th''  ^  nited  States  were  not  compriz- 
ed in  that  order,  but  ordered  that  our  property  which  had  been  seized  should 
remain  .ser/iii'.iWrri/.  On  the  1st  of  ,lidy,  thev  rejK'aled  it  wholly  as  to  the  United 
Stales — Hut  on  the  27th  of  the  same  month,  they  repeal  the  repealinif  act,  and 
declure  that  the  confiseatin);'  decree  shall  be  executed  accordini^-  to  its  letter. 

The  resendilance  tin  re  is  between  this  conduct,  and  tiiat  in  rejjard  to  the. 
Berlin  decree,  is  very  remarkable, 


No.  10. 


Recapitulations  of  the  Points  established; — and  IJefi.ections  upon  them 

THE  cxamiin.tion  in  detail  of  the  diplomatic  intercourse  of  our  ad- 
Tniiustriition,  rccjuircs  no  ordiniiry  share  of  patience  and  attention ;  and 
it  vvonid  be  in  vi.in  that  we  should  expect  of  our  readers  hi  general,  the 
sacrifices  of  their  ease  necessary  to  such  an  investigation.  But  if  the 
situation  of  our  country  is  really  as  perilous  as  the  language  of  the  Presi- 
dent, of  the  members  of  Congress,  and  the  complaints  and  anxiety  of  the 
people  would  prove,  surely  it  is  not  too  much  to  expect  of  the  patriotism 
of  our  fellow-citizens,  that  they  will  examine  and  weigh  with  <  andour  and 
seriousness,  the  results'  of  the  labotu's  of  those,  who  from  ^aiy  motives 
have  been  induced  to  look  more  profoundly  and  more  patiently  into  the 
causes  of  oiu"  disasters. 

1  shall  therefore  undertake  to  state  briefly  the  inferences  which  are 
necessarily  drawn  from  the  examination  of  the  very  ex  raordinary  diplo- 


^1 


•  rl 


h 


r/ 


'^ 


^ 


49 

matic  conduct  of  our  administration,  and  I  invite  thosr  who  may  doubt 
the  correctness  of  these  ir.t'ertuces,  to  cxun.inc  tlic  prrt  (•(lii.'^  numhcis 
of  the  "  Ar.,  lysis,"  upon  which  ihese  inrcitiices  are  lo'iiuicl. 

It  has  appcurcd  in  the  course  of  our  invcstiKwlion,  that  our  adiDii.istra- 
tion,so  fur  from  nuiinUiining  an  impartial  and  di^nified  (oiirse  of  conduct 
towards  the  belli^;erent  nations,  has  sought  for  apoloij,ies  lor  thi  ati  ui  ious 
violations  of  our  ri^:hts  on  tie  part  of  I'  ranee,  and  has  been  disposed  not 
only  to  put  the  most  unfavourai)le  ctmstructions  upon  the  conduct  ol  the 
Briiish  cabinet,  but  to  compel  that  nauon  to  an  open  declaration  of  war, 
or  hi  failure  of  that  plan,  to  louse  the  passions  of  the  American  people  in 
such  a  manner  as  to  idlIvc  them  desiie,  and  demand  a  declaration  ol  war 
on  our  part  a>i;ainst  Great  Britain. 

This  partiality,  and  this  project,  have  been  evident  from  the  following 
facts  established  by  this  analysis  : — 

Firstly.  That  early  in  1807,  thfe  j^overnrnent  of  the  United  States  chose 
to  put  a  favourable  interpretation  on  the  French  Berlin  decree — an  inter- 
pretation directly  ojm  osed  to  its  poMlive  and  explicit  terms ; — that  it  ac- 
cepted, as  an  explanation  of  that  decree,  an  informal,  unauthoriiicd,  and 
inexplicit  declaration  of  a  subordinate  officer,  in  which  it  appears  by 
iubstqutnt  papers,  the  government  in  truth  placed  no  serious  reliance, 
but  considered  that  a  positive  confirmation  on  the  part  of  the  Emperor 
was  absolutely  necessaiy. 

Secondly.  That  such  a  favourable  explanation  of  the  Berlin  decree  has 
never  been  obtained,  but  on  the  contrary,  the  only  opinions  expressed  hy 
proper  authority  in  France  have  been  hi  favour  of  its  literal  execution. 

Tldrdlij.  That  although  no  evidence  existed  as  proved  by  the  forego- 
ing positions,  that  France  had  determined  to  relax  the  rigour  of  her  de- 
eree  as  to  us,  but  by  the  confession  of  our  own  government  ii  was  from 
its  date  enforced  in  the  West  Indies,  in  all  the  tributary  states,  and  more 
particularly  in  neutral  and  sovereign  countries,  by  Freitch  arms  ;  yet  no 
formal  remonstrance  was  ever  made  by  our  submissive  rulers,  until  Gen- 
•ral  Armstrong's  letter  of  November  12lh  1807,  one  day  after  the  date 
•f  the  British  orders,  retaliaung  those  ot  Berlin. 

Fourthly.  The  government  of  the  United  States,  so  far  from  remonstrate 
ing  against  the  French  decree,  have  a/iologized  for  it  on  two  grounds  :— 

Firntly.  That  it  was  merehj  municipal,  and  therefore  la-MfuL  This  we  h&"e  dis- 
proved by  shewing'  that  it  was  enforced  in  ventral  and  imlependent  couiitilf s, 
where,  though  the  French  arins  were  predominant,  yei  the  local  sovereignty  was 
•till  aclciwtuledged,  and  therttbre  l^'rance  was  precluded  fromconsidcring  them  aS 
oonquercd  countries  :  \\  c  allude  to  Hamburg  und  Tuscany. 

Secondly.  -Mr.  Aiadison  has  apologized  for  the  French  decrees  on  the  ground 
•f  their  being  retaliatory  on  Bi  itish  former  usurpations.  To  this  objection,  or 
apoloiij'y,  it  has  been  replied :  1.^/.  That  Britain  has  set  up  no  doctrines  not 
recognized  either  by  the  law  of  nations  or  tlie  example  of  France,  in  which  latter 
•ase.  it  was  contended  that  France  could  find  no  fault.  2dly.  That  had  such 
•uses  of  British  usurpation  existed,  (which  is  denied,)  they  must  have  been  such 
as  existed  prior  to  our  treaty  with  France,  aiid  that  treaty  merged  or  destroyed 
ftU  pre-existing  causes  of  complaint.  It  is  not  competent  now  for  France  to  urge 
as  a  ground  of  her  venffeunce  against  us,  anv  principles  or  facta  which  existed 
prior  t»  that  treaty,  in  which  we  gave  up  to  her  twenty  ntiUions  of  just  chiinte. 


l^> 


■•.;•« 


50 


.V 


Th^  fifth  f^ehCrftl  inference  from  these  dispatches  is  that  the  lanf^tuip;e, 
the  tone  and  temper,  luloj-.tid  towards  (ircat  liritiiin  and  l-"raiitc,  demon- 
8tr  te  the  most  humble  siiljinission  to  the  latter  and  a  fixed  determination 
to  uflVont  and  c|uurrei  villi  the  foiMner.  Wc  refer  our  readers  to  No.  8 
of  tl.is  analysis  for  the  pioofs  of  his  assertion. 

SUthly.  While  there  is  a  pretended  inip.irti  .lity  in  the  offers  to  Great 
Bt  itLJn  and  1  rancc,  it  appears  tlu.t  to  the  latter  the  positive  ofler  was  that 
of  an  alliance  in  the  war  aK  a  condition  of  the  repeal  of  her  decrees  ;  i)utto 
Great  liritain,  the  ii.sidlinj!;  and  b«rren  ofler  of  a  repeal  of  the  Kmbarj^o 
Was  the  only  proffered  inducement  ;-un  ofler  which  we  proved  to  be  des- 
titute of  reciprocity,  artVontive,  mean,  inconsistent  and  hypocritical. 

Sivcnf/ily.  We  have  shewn  tiiat  neither  of  the  oflcrs  was  in  fact  sin- 
cere, tlioiigh  that  to  France  was  made  with  the  perfect  approbation  of  the 
Emperor. 

The  offer  of  war  to  IVance  was  absiu'd,  because  it  was  on  the  condition 
of  the  non-repe:d  of  the  British  ordrri,  when  it  was  perfectly  certahi  that 
Great  Britain  woidd  repeal  those  orders  as  soon  as  the  decrees  of  I'rance 
shoidd  be  removerl. 

i'i.e  offer  to  Great  Biitain  was  equally  insincere,  because  it  was  moral- 
ly ( citain  that  she  could  never  repeal  her  orders  until  the  French  decrees 
were  rcinoved. 

Because  her  orders  were  avowedly  j^roimded  on  the  French  decrees, 
and  it  would  blast  her  reputation  for  sincerity  should  she  withdraw  them 
without  tlie  repeal  of  the  avowed  causes.  ^v 

IJecause  it  would  huinl)le  her  before  her  enemy. 

Because  it  would  degrade  her  before  us,  and  would  he  an  admission 
that  we  could  at  any  moment  starve  her  into  any  concession  of  her  just 
rights. 

Because,  in  fine,  our  offer  was  coupled  with  conditions  affrontive  to  her 
cabinet,  and  while  wc  continued  our  interdiction  of  her  public  ships,  whi'" 
was  ct  itself  a  barrier  to  all  negotiation. 

Such  are  the  proofs  (^f  insincerity  evinced  by  the  dispatches  which  we 
have  exan\incd.  Wc  have  offered  a  solution  of  the  causes  of  these  ex- 
traordinaiy  proposals. 

To  France,  who  not  only  understood  our  game,  but  who  had  directed  it, 
no  apology  was  necessary. 

To  Great-britt.in,  mean  and  false  apologies  were  offered  ;  our  govern- 
ment even  condescended  to  declare  that  our  measures  were  purely  muni- 
ciiil  ;*nd  in  no  degree  hostile,  though  Giles,  and  Campbell,  and  Gallatin, 
and  all  our  piiv.ite  democratic  champions  avow  that  they  were  intended 
to  corrce  Gie  .t-Britain.  But  our  Machiai  els  did  not  deceive  the  -British 
Cabinet,  and  if  the  honest  and  indignant  language  of  Mr.  Canning,  though 
couched  in  the  decorum  of  diplomatic  forms,  did  not  reach  the  consciences 
of  our  rulers  and  excite  a  blush  of  shame,  we  can  only  regret  the  degener- 
acy of  the  age  and  of  our  country  in  having  such  rulers. 

The  only  iriotive  in  making  these  insidious  ofters,  insincere  towards 
both,  in  concert  with  one)  and  understood  perfectly  by  the  other,  was  to 


/' 


51 


luapjc, 
Inion* 
Jiution 
|No.  8 

CJrcat 

that 

l)utto 

(leb« 

t  sin- 
if  the 


^,.^ 


^K 


ilifle  the  clamours,  and  impose  upon  the  blind  crcduli'y  of  the  Americtui 
people. 

Never  did  there  exist  a  people  on  whom  the  most  barefaced  and  shame- 
less hypocriMy  couid  be  so  successfully  pr«cli>.ecl  ; — if  I  may  judt^c  fix)m 
the  app  .rent  success  of  this  project.  From  one  end  of  tl>e  continent  to 
the  other,  these  dispatches,  wiih  the  exception  of  the  Evenin:^-Post  at  N. 
York,  and  a  few  independent  papers  in  other  places,  appear  to  be  received 
•very  where  with  indirt(;rence,  with  forbearance — or  even  acrjuiesceiice. 
The  general  silence  seems  to  be  an  implied  admission  th..t  tl  c  govern- 
ment have  suddenly  dcpcirted  fi«jni  their  crooked  policy  and  Ikvc  adopted 
something  like  a  fair  course  towards  the  twobellif^erents.  This  proceeds 
solely  fmm  that  indolence  wliich  will  not  examine,  or  that  spirit  of  sub- 
mission which  shrinks  i.t  the  bold  effort  of  stemming  popular  prejudices. 

I  have  undertaken,  thoiigh  conscious  of  my  inferiority  to  resist  this  cur- 
vent,  to  call  men  Ijack  to  reason  and  ihcmselvcs. 

I^lhc  administration  h  id  until  this  moment  beCn  pure  and  unspotted  ;— 
if  it  had  evinced  the  most  honest  imparli.ilily,  I  think  the  present  dispatches 
would  prove  that  they  have  submitted  themselves  to  the  domination  of 
France,  and  are  fatally  bent  upon  producing  an  open  collision  with  Great 
Britain. 

It  is  impossii)Ie  for  a  man,  however  charitable,  to  peruse  these  dispatch- 
es and  connect  tiiem  with  the  most  extraordinaiy  measures  of  our  cabi- 
net hitherto  adopted  and  now  proposed,  without  coming  to  this  result, 
that  an  alliance  either  express  or  implied  exists  between  the  cabinet  of 
Washington  and  that  of  St.  Cloud. 

The  present  rufers  of  the  United  States  have  at  all  periods  of  their  pub- 
lic life,  united  their  fortvmes  with  those  o*"  France.  The  politics  and  in- 
terest of  their  own  country  seem  to  have  been  always  subservient  iii  their 
minds  to  those  of  their  foreign  friends.  I  will  not  m^ike  the  charge  of 
corruption  ; — it  matters  not  to  the  private  ciiizen  whether  the  ruinous  and 
destructive  conduct  of  public  men  proceeds  iVom  --'eeprooted  partialities, 
and  antipathies,  from  corruption,  or  the  hopes  of  future  reward  ;  t.^e  alarm- 
ing fact  is  e(|ually  to  be  regarded  from  whatever  source  it  may  proceed. 

In  reviewing  the  histoiy  of  the  United  States,  I  find  that  in  17^0  .i.d 
1782  Mr.  Jeflerson  and  Mr.  Madison,  and  the  \'irgini\n  oligarchy,  were 
too  much  devoted  to  France.  I  Hud  Mr.  Samuel  Adams  and  c\\  the  New 
England  delegation,  when  no  British  party  could  be  pretended  to  exist, 
equally  hostile  to  this  1-  rench  faction. 

In  examining  further  I  perceive  Mr.  Jefferson  and  Mr.  Madison  taking 
the  side  of  France  in  17  J3,  opposing  our  NEUTRALITY  ;  of  the  good 
effects  of  which  they  h.ive  the  unparalleled  audacity  to  boast  at  the  present 
day.  I  find  them  charging  Washington  with  base  ingratitude  for  not  join- 
ing France  against  Great  Britain.  I  find  them  intimate  with  and  praishig 
Genet,  and  Fauchet,  and  Adet  and  equally  praised  and  esteemed  and  con- 
fided hi  by  these  foreign  nunisters.  I  find  them  for  fifteen  ye  irs  radical- 
ly and  unn^o.eAbly  hostile  to  England.  I  find  that  by  stirring  up  and  cul» 
Uvaiing  the  prejudices  of  the  n«tion  against  Great  Britam  they  have  iic- 
r|Uired  and  retained  their  power.    Sh«U  I  then  presume  a  mracle  wrought^ 


i\ 


.(/ 


■'I 


&2 


!n  the  hearts  of  these  rulen,  and  that  in  a  moment  they  have  renounced 
all  their  partialities  and  antipatliies,  and  endeavored  Kbnestly  to  promote  a 
feir  and  equal,  correct  and  impartiui  understanding  with  botli  ? 

This  would  be  a  stretch  of  charity  too  great  for  human  powers. 

Let  us  then  view  them  as  they  are,  fallible^  imperfect  men  ;  of  passions 
like  unto  others,  devoted  to  France,  and  deeply  hostile  lo  Great  Britain. 

Has  their  conduct  coiifdded  vvith  this  state  of  things  ?  aiid  if  it  has,  is  it 
the  rea/sojiVcf- of  all*  Qur  evils  ? 

In  February  1807»  a  treaty  was  made  with  Great  Britidn  by  two  men  not 
suspected  of  partiiUity  to  that  nation — they  were  satisfied  it  would  be  a- 
greeable  to  the  United  States  ;  and  so  Mr.  Jefferson  assured  Congress  ia 
a  formal* message. 

In  the  interim  the  Berlin  decree  arrived  ;  this  ought  to  have  strength- 
ened the  motives  to  amicable  adjustment  with  England. 

But  this  treaty  so  made,  and  indeed  excellent  in  its  provisions,  was  re- 
jected without  the  ordinary  respect  and  deliberation  given  to  t  <?s  made 
wi"h  Indian  tribes.  Great  Britain  though  she  felt  the  affront,  ^^  she  hud 
made  unexpected  concessions  in  that  treaty)  dissembled  her  ser-^ations, 
and  professed  her  disposition  to  retain  her  good  tu\de;'staiiding  with  us. 

In  the  mv-an  while  an  unauthorized  briilsh  olficer  accidentally  favours 
the  views  of  our  cabinet.  Provoked,  too  much  provoked  by  a  imeful 
encouragement  of  British  draertcrs^  'a  pi'lnciple  which  in  these  'dispatches 
our  government  concedes  to  be  wrongs  this  officer  causes  ai>  uvtack  on. 
©ne  of  our  rtational  sr  ids. 

Without  waiting  for  tl.'^  usual  remedy,  without  confiding  in  the  justice 
of  the  aoven-igii,  ignorant  and  of  course  innocent  *.  t'the  offence,  our  gov- 
ernment assumed  the  reparation,  and  by  ixnact  of  uvo^-Mcd  hoaiiUty  compel 
Great  Briu.in  either  to  make  -war  or  refuse  redress. 

Overlookiui^  this  "urposed  insult,  ui:d  taking  counsel  from  magnani- 
mity rather  than  an^,  /  pride,,  she  sends  js  a  special  envoy  to  p»arnte  our 
i'cs*.  ntment.     But  adheriiig  to  our  designed  punctilios  wx  reject  him. 

Pending  this  affair  Bonaparte  fdrbids  oui-  trade  with  Great  Britain—* 
writes  a  note  declaring  us  at  v/ar,  and  threatening  confiiication,  and  his  re- 
ijentmeui  in  case  we  refuse.  He  orders  a  suspension  of  all  commerce  on  the 
Dirt  of  all  those  nations  whose  artm  \\\  aciiv  war  would  be  of  no  avail. 
«^.,  We  came  within  this  description,  and  obedient  to  his  rescrijit  in  four 
days  after  receipt  of  his  orders  (a  time  which  Colonel  Pickeruig  observes 
was  sufficiently  short  for  auch  a  hlati)  we  issue  an  edict  waging  war  with 
all  the  commerce  of  the  U .  States,  and  all  the  rights  of  the  commercial  States. 

This  was  first  avowed  to  be  merely  municipal  ;— but  it  is  now  acknow- 
ledged by  Mr.  G'ies  and  Mr.G  illatin  to  have  been /josf//f  to  Great  Britain. 
So  Bonaparte  unue'^tands  it,  and  in  two  public  official  French  declara- 
^ons,  it  is  praised  as  being  a  ,'ixx)Fof  our  hostility  to  Great  Biitahi,  or  iij 
Other  words  our  subserviency  to  France.  Still  something  remained  tc  be  done 
to  pla."e  us  on  as  favoured  a  footing  with  Bonaparte  as  Holland  or  Italy. 

Mr.  Campbell's  Non- Intercourse  resolution  eflects  this,  and  as  Mr.  Gal- 

declaration  of  war 

I  termination. 
\ 


\  \    latin  observes,  there  is  no  distinction  betweeu  this  and  a  decla^ 
W^  ''^r««it  JiiitMin-^tt<hhiisb««neur  policy— auch  its  fatiU 


^ 


r»**i— * 


\J. 


A 


111 


i'^)  1/ 


■a«s<;,^. 


